[Patents] Re: Patents digest, Vol 1 #292 - 13 msgs

[Edward Avis epa98@doc.ic.ac.uk]

>From: Gregory Aharonian <srctran@world.std.com>

>>I want to be shown an invention which deserved a patent because
>>it took large amounts of funding to discover it, and would not be
>>profitable without a patent.
>
>The amount of time and resources needed to create an invention has
>never been a criteria for determining a patent, and is idiotic when
>you think about it - it would reserve the patent system to only
>those with lots of time and money.

Of course.  We want a simple patent system where it is clear what is
patentable and what is not.  Nobody is advocating that the patent office
should make value judgements on individual patents.

But when deciding what classes of things the state should grant patent
monopolies on, of course we should weigh up the benefits and
disadvantages.  These will depend on how difficult it was to create the
invention and how much the incentive to invent depends on patentability,
as well as many other criteria.

To make an analogy: nobody suggests that when a suspected drug dealer is
tried in court the judge or jury should agonize about the rights and
wrongs of drug law, and sentence or convict based on their opinion of
what decision would best serve society.  It is the court's job to uphold
the law (interpreting it in cases where it is unclear), and to do so
in a consistent manner for all cases.

But when the legislature decides what laws should be passed, what acts
should be made illegal, of course it should decide based on what is best
for society.  For example, you might not have the same laws applied to
alcohol as to tobacco, because you might feel that it's best
for the law to distinguish between the two.  Even if this makes the law
appear 'inconsistent' to some people.  Even if the big drinks companies
could make more money if the age for purchasing alcohol were lowered to
the same as for tobacco.

>Increasingly these discussions are focussing more and more not on
>getting rid of software patents, but all patents.

I don't think many people here are against patents in areas where they
have been shown to be useful.  But the problem is that software and
business method patents are tarnishing the name of the patent system as
a whole.

-- 
Ed Avis
epa98@doc.ic.ac.uk