There is absolutely nothing inherently evil about so-called
"software patents." If an invention has honestly been made then it
makes no difference whatsoever if its implemented in software or
with gears and levers, the inventor deserves protection.
The problem lies with the Patent Office for issuing patents for
prior art. Funniest example I know of is "Method of Exercising a
Cat" http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5443036.html. Its a laser
pointer. Who hasn't played with a cat using a flashlight or mirror
before laser pointers were invented?
Doesn't the fact that the patent office is unable to check for prior
art make software patents inherently evil? There is almost no
plausible way, given the nature of the internet, to check for prior
art in software. Especially if companies are trying to patent
computing concepts, like email, or a web server, etc.
Another example is that the Patent Office used to new patents for
old technology simply because the new claim specified a 10" disk
drive rather than 12". This silliness was mostly resolved between
5-1/4" and 3-1/2".
There is nothing wrong with being compensated for ones work, and own
ideas; but given that in the new world of computing and software
(relatively) it's damn near impossible to make sure that it is your
_own_ ideas and work that you're trying to patent and play off as
your own.
-R. Tyler Ballance
_______________________________________________
freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
