On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 8:31 AM, Jon 'maddog' Hall <mad...@li.org> wrote:
> > This article about software patents popped up today. Any comments about > the relevance and possibilities of software patent reform to the point > of reversal and removal? > > > http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2010/07/death_knell_for.html;jsessionid=GXGKJE0XM2GPJQE1GHPSKH4ATMY32JVN?cid=nl_IW_daily_2010-07-17_t > > md > > > Although lengthy (why do podcastsers try so hard to be chatty?), I found the Software Freedom Law Center commentary by Dan Ravicher, Bradley Kuhn and Karen Sandler very informative on the Bilski case, and the mechanics of the judicial system. http://www.softwarefreedom.org/podcast/2010/jun/29/episode-0x2b-bilski-rundown/ Even more interesting was Dan Ravicher's presentation against the notion of software patents. http://www.softwarefreedom.org/podcast/2010/may/25/episode-0x28-dans-software-patent-presentation/ In the presentation Dan presents clear statistics which explain how absurd, and absolutely untenable the system is [1]. In a nutshell, to be a "good" software developer who wanted to avoid infringing other's patents, you would need to review 750 new patents per week. And, reviewing them would open you up to triple ("treble") damages for willful infringement. I'm glad to see that post-Bilski (which didn't seem to change much and is in-itself an oddity from the Supreme Court), the interpretations have seemed so far to favor the anti-software-patent position. Regarding the point from Jeffry Smith: > would love to see a study showing the extent to > > which software patents promote or hinder "the progress of science and > > useful arts" > > James Bessen - of Research on Innovation (researchoninnovation.org) and Boston University School of Law (Visiting Researcher) and Robert Hunt - of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia published a paper [2] which concludes "We find evidence that software patents substitute for R&D at the firm level; they are associated with lower R&D intensity. This result occurs primarily in industries known for strategic patenting and is difficult to reconcile with the traditional incentive theory of patents." I haven't read Bessen's book "Patent Failure" but I'm sure there is a lot more evidence in the book about specific evidence that illustrates how the patent system fails to meet any of it's original goal. [1] Software Patents Issued Every Week ~ 750 Patent Lawsuits Filed Every Week ~ 55 Defending Self from One Suit ~ $2 – 4M Sending a Patent Threat (“Notification”) Letter = $0.39 Getting Required Opinion After Receiving Letter ~ $40K [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bessen/Hunt_technique <http://www.softwarefreedom.org/podcast/2010/jun/29/episode-0x2b-bilski-rundown/> Greg Rundlett p.s. With a Droid phone (and no doubt others?), you can subscribe to audio podcasts like that from the SFLC and listen to them when driving etc. p.p.s. One irony I discovered was that I downloaded the "Patent Absurdity" http://patentabsurdity.com/watch.html film and couldn't play it on my Droid because the Droid doesn't do ogg!
_______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
