[Patents] natural forces

[PILCH Hartmut phm@a2e.de]

You are taking far too much trouble with this troll who ignores good
arguments and reiterates long-refuted arguments for the fifth or more
time.

On Wed, 22 Nov 2000, Jesus M. Gonzalez-Barahona wrote:

> Gregory Aharonian writes:
>  > Finally, if you can induce infringement by showing someone source
>  > code that infringes a patent, you can induce infringement by showing
>  > someone a circuit diagram that infringes a patent.  The expression
>  > of the device (circuit diagram, source code) has no bearing, 
>  > especially if use software (VHDL, Verilog) to transfer information
>  > about a digital circuit to someone else.  I argue that this is yet
>  > another aspect of the hardware/software codesign equivalence -
>  > with VHDL I can represent a new device/invention in a generic way,
>  > and then let the computer automatically generate a circuit diagram
>  > or source code to implement the new device/invention.  Showing the
>  > VHDL to someone else represents both the hardware and software worlds.
> 
> Imagine a whole operating system with thousands of applications which
> is distributed as source code. Imagine a system for automatically
> download it, compile it, and install it. Imagine that the source code
> hits hundreds of patents. Imagine that any user around the world can
> do this donwload-compile-install (and use) process.
> 
> When I describe this system to lawyers, they inmediately talk to me
> about contributory infringement. I'm not a lawyer myself, adn it seems
> that this figure is not well defined, to say the least. But it seems
> that if a company distributes programs this way, they are looking for
> trouble.
> 
> Well, this system is not really virtual. It exists and is called
> Debian GNU/Linux or FreeBSD, for instance. Do you mean that both
> Debian and FreeBSD can be distributed in source code and that they are
> never going to have legal problems related to patents? I'd like to
> hear informed opinions aobut this, since I'm mostly interested on
> libre software, where you can always design systems this way.
> 
> On the other hand, I still have to see a VHDL *design* doing something
> useful. Of course, the harware you build using the design can do lots
> of useful things. In the case of software, there is no diference
> between design and "the thing that does useful things". Source code
> (and even binary code) is a detailed design. And source code (or more
> usually binary code) is "the thing that makes useful things". Here
> lies (one of) the difference...
> 
>  > 
>  > Look, I have no problem with people's criticisms and attacks ono
>  > software patents here - some have legitimate grounds.  I just
>  > don't believe that software is really that different for those
>  > attacks to be applied to other areas of technology.
>  > 
>  > You don't like a patent holder getting control of a new invention
>  > for 20 years?  Fine, but those in other industries (and consumers)
>  > have the same complaints as well.  You don't like patents
>  > restricting the flow and communication of ideas?  Fine, but those
>  > in other industries have the same complaint as well.  Software is
>  > not that special to be treated differently under the patent laws.
> 
> I understand that many others may have compalints on patents in other
> industries. And maybe they are right. But we have something different
> here, in the same sense that a mathematical theorem is different,
> and (for now) not covered by patent law. Of course somebody can come
> and say that mathematics are not that diferent, and that they should
> be covered by patent law. And to some extent tehy are doing it with
> software patents. But that doesn't mean that I should agree that
> mathematics is not different to other "indistries" with patents ;-)
> 
> Saludos,
> 
>         Jesus.
> 
> PS: I see you very interested in comparing with other industries. And
> maybe that is an interesting point of view. But I prefer it the
> other way around. Let's discuss whether software patents provide
> enough benefit for the society, when compared to the harm they
> cause. Maybe from this discussion people knowing other industries can
> extract conclussions valid in other industries. But at least we should
> be able of extracting conclussions valid for the software industry.
> 
> -- 
> Jesus M. Gonzalez Barahona                | Grupo de Sistemas y 
> Comunicaciones
> jgb@gsyc.escet.urjc.es / jgb@computer.org | ESCET, Universidad Rey Juan 
> Carlos 
> tel: +34 91 664 74 67                     | c/ Tulipan s/n
> fax: +34 91 664 74 90                     | 28933 Mostoles, Spain
>