Stanislav Malyshev wrote on 2003-07-03: > BC>> Well, I see no reason why the person reviewing the software > BC>> patents shouldn't be an expert in programming (but not knowing > BC>> every existing program, of course). He should be required to be > BC>> an expert, else how can we entrust him to grant patents in this > BC>> field? > > OK. Then let's see - first of all, there is no such thing as "expert in > programming" - no more than "expert in medicine" - there are > specialisations. So either patent office should have a staff of an > university and more, or it should retain the services of external experts. > Which means patent application is going to cost _a real lot_ of money and > take a real lot of time to complete. Which is not exactly what the patents > are meant for. BTW, even with this scheme nobody really guarantees that > expert will do thorough work (after all, what means of control over him > does the office have?) or that he will not just be bribed by the patent > submitter. > Fair points. They apply to all kinds of patents, BTW. Anyway currently the US patent offices pass through some patents (especially but not only in software) that are ridiculous even to people with basic programming background. See http://lpf.ai.mit.edu/Patents/anatomy-trivial-patent.txt for an example.
-- Beni Cherniavsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "Reading the documentation I felt like a kid in a toy shop." -- Phil Thompson on Python's standard library ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
