[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]
(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec)
(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
- From: PILCH Hartmut phm@a2e.de
- Subject: [Patents] simple questions
- Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 14:32:06 +0200 (CEST)
> I would like to ask people who agree with software patents some simple
> questions.
> Do you think that IT needed patents to get better?
> Don't you think that it was already working well, without patenting
> everything?
I often tell patent professionals that I am drafting proposals to abolish
the examination system and instead place the burden of examination on the
applicant, who will have to pay a fine to reward the first successful
patent buster.
The usual response I get from patent professionals is:
if it ain't broke don't fix it
Unfortunately these same patent professionals are thirsty for extending
their system to areas that ain't broke. And by doing that, they expose
the brokenness of their system, which otherwise might not surface.
-phm
- [Patents] simple questions, Roberto Micarelli mi . ro
- <Possible follow-ups>
- [Patents] simple questions, PILCH Hartmut phm
- [Patents] simple questions,
Nicolas MONNET nico
- [Patents] simple questions,
Gregory Aharonian srctran
- [Patents] simple questions,
dewaz dewaz
- [Patents] simple questions,
PILCH Hartmut phm
- [Patents] simple questions,
Steve Probert steve . probert
- [Patents] simple questions,
PILCH Hartmut phm
- [Patents] simple questions,
Steve Probert steve . probert
- [Patents] simple questions,
Steve Probert steve . probert
- [Patents] simple questions,
Gregory Aharonian srctran
- [Patents] simple questions,
PILCH Hartmut phm
(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.
(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)