Re: Patent source code?

From: Gerry Quinn (gerryq_at_indigo.ie)
Date: 02/26/04 

Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:52:12 GMT

In article <slrnc3phbm.vme.willem@toad.stack.nl>, Willem <willem@stack.nl> wrote:
>Gerry wrote:
>) Some in Europe - you certainly don't speak for all Europeans (including
>) those running the EPO). However, if software patents did not provide
>) some protection, it is hard to see why anyone would 'desperately' oppose
>) them.
>
>Of course software patents provide protection. For rich companies.
>The companies I worked at patented everything that seemed like a really
>good idea, and published everything else, just to protect themselves from
>other people gaining patents and sueing.
>However, a lonely freelance programmer doesn't have the resources to patent
>every idea he comes up with.

Since doing that would not be cost effective for anyone, it hardly
matters.

>) And an initial patent application in europe costs only a few
>) thousand, I believe - not outside the financial resources of most people
>) capable of novel invention. The idea that the law serves only the rich
>) is nonsense, the last resort of those who have no real case to argue.
>
>Saying that without a counter argument is nonsense in itself.

On the contrary, it's clear and obvious that neither the purpose nor
action of the law is to serve only the rich. Of course, the rich have
more goods to protect - on the other hand they pay more taxes for law
enforcement.

>I claim that the idea that the law serves only the rich, and the case of
>patent law, is a valid claim and can't be wiped off the table with such a
>general deadbeat argument.

Deadbeat argument - is that when you can't get compensation from
somebody who has stolen your physical or intellectual property because
they are deadbeats, and you can't even recover legal costs? This is a
case where the law favours the poor. What about Dow Corning, destroyed
by false claims of compensation related to silicone implants?

>Fighting a patent case in court takes a huge amount of money.
>Therefore rich people and companies have a large advantage when it comes to
>patents.

I will concede that they have advantages in some respects. On the other
hand, if they are suing someone who cannot afford compensation, it can
be argued that the defendant has an enormous advantage as the
patent-holder is on a hiding to nothing.

- Gerry Quinn

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
    ... designs protected by design patents and copyright, ... functionalities protected by patents and many ... The Tivo box is not "a collection of literary ... enough enough to gain copyright protection. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: 3rd party ink cartridge in some peril.
    ... Don't YOU believe that environmental impact should come before economic protection or protection of intellectual property? ... Bob Headrick wrote: ... and if signed into law by GW Bush, will likely put an end to import into the US or manufacture by US companies or any cartridges which violate the patents, not only for Epson products, but probably all inkjet printer models, as the law will be broad enough to "protect" all manufacturers of patented cartridges. ...
    (comp.periphs.printers)
  • Re: Patent
    ... The purpose of the _publication_ of patents is to publicize them. ... AFAIK the idea is that the patent offers the inventor ... still maintain the protection of the intellectual property. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: More on Releasing New Software
    ... > aspect that was not addressed was protection. ... I don't know squat about patents and trademarks. ... You don't have to register it, ... maintain a copy of the source code for every version on disk. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: WTF patents
    ... protection against a competitor copying your work can't be provided. ... I would argue that whether or not patents are necessary to protect ... There are plenty of things the government could give me that it ...
    (sci.electronics.design)