On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:57 AM, Russel Winder <rus...@winder.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 21:31 -0700, Cédric Beust ♔ wrote: > […] > > I certainly didn't hand wave it off, I presented evidence that the > current > > system is certainly creating a healthy amount of innovation as well. If > you > > want to prove your point, you need to build a case explaining why your > > ideas will not make these positive effects disappear as well. > > I am not sure you have proven the connection between patents and > innovation. I was not trying to prove anything. I was responding to the claim "The system is completely broken" by giving a few examples that show that the system is not as broken as claimed. Could it be improved? Of course, and I gave a few suggestions to that effect in the past discussions. But anyone who claims that the current system completely stifles innovation needs to pause for a moment and look at the the US track record in software innovation (pretty good compared to all the other countries). Maybe the current system *slows down* innovation, but none of the ideas I've heard so far that purport to fix this have met the burden of proof that under these new rules, there would be more innovation than there is right now. -- Cédric -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
