[Patents] Re: Hypothetical Example

[hellmuth@ira.uka.de hellmuth@ira.uka.de]

Hadmut Pilch wrote; 
> Wrong. The patent prevents people from implementing the algorithms
> independently.  So if the vendor chooses to implements it only as part of
> one poorly designed database system that runs only on one poorly designed
> OS, then you have to put up with this poor design or else "invest 130 man
> years to invent an alternative algorithm" as Nick put it in the example.

Ok, now I get it. Still, if I play devil's advocate again I'd counter
that you don't have to design a different algorithm, the usual way is to
licence the patent if you need it. (A shortsighted objection, but
one that is bound to come up and should be refuted in the example itself)

> The withholding of source code in this example is confusing.  As I
> understand it, it is only an extra level of harrassment that keeps the
> customer from improving the product for his own inhouse work.  If the
> program came with open source, he might try to port it to a better
> designed OS and remove some of the nastiest limitations.  Without the

That's what I was getting at. The example makes a case for open source,
thereby diverting from the real issue. Even if patents encourage secrecy, this
link is not apparent and would have to be substantuated. 
IMHO this is a side issue, something you won't get a politician to care for
very much. It should be left out of the example or presented as an 
afterthought.

                                                        Holger