From nico@monnet.to  Wed Oct 11 10:03:36 2000
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:03:36 +0200 (CEST)
From: Nicolas MONNET nico@monnet.to
Subject: [Patents] Some remarks on Vol 1 #284

On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Steve Probert wrote:

|>No, it doesn't. In most other fields you dont give your invention away to
|>anyone who feels like grabbing a copy of it. In most other fields your
|>major cost is in massproduction. If you have money to massproduce
|>something (even at a small scale) you have money to make a >patentsearch.
|>In software the duplication costs are very, very small. The research
|>periods and costs also tend to be small (exceptions exist) compared to
|>chemical industry and other traditional industries.  
|
|I see your point (and I've used that argument a few times myself), but
|allow me to play devil's advocate a little longer here.  Are you saying
|that individuals and small companies have an inherent advantage when it
|comes to breaking into the software industry (ie because the start-up
|costs are low) and that therefore the system should give them even more
|help by sparing them the cost of doing patent searches, but that when it
|comes to other industries where the initial costs are higher to begin
|with, then the system should add to their burden by requiring them to be
|aware of the IP rights of others?  The cynic might argue that the money
|they save on the start-up costs can be usefully put towards patent
|searching.

Startup? What startup? Do I have to form a startup to contribute to the
gcc project? Do I have to form a startup just because I want to try out
some software idea I just got and publish it on the net?

The whole point of a lot of free software project is that you don't intend
to make money on the project directly; it could be, for example, some
piece of software you use for your job but that you could'nt sell as is,
and that you want to share with others so that others might contribute.

It's hard to come up with funds for patent research in that setup.





