[Patents] Economic assessment

[Gregory Aharonian srctran@world.std.com]

Ed writes:
>In the case of software, you have to decide whether the benefits from
>worthwhile software patents outweigh the losses from bad software
>patents.  It's a matter of opinion how many software patents are
>economically useful ones, but I'm sure everyone on this list will
>agree that such swpats as are worthwhile are heavily outweighed by
>the mass of bad patents.

Which may or may not be true for not only software patents, but all
other areas of technology.  Talk to biotechnology researchers - they
have even bigger complaints than software developers over the large
number of questionable biotech patents that require researchers to get
licenses to do their research, a far more onerous and freedom-restricting
problem than anything software developers are complaining about.

I would guess in most field, the bad patents far outweigh the good patents,
and one can question whether society as a whole gains a net benefit.

Which makes this line of attack on software patents solely, unjust.  If
you are going to question the social economic benefits of software
patents, you have to do it to most areas of technology where there are
major complaints about patent quality.  In fact, for years I have been
arguing for studies (not opinions) to be done of the quality of issued
patents in a variety of fields, studies which could produce the raw
data to consider economic impacts.

Economic impact is a valid criticism of the software patenting system.
But like many other aspects of software patents vis-a-vis other areas
of technology, the criticism must be applied to these other areas as
well.  If you look back in history, you will see these complaints about
software patents written about other new technologies - each wave of
new technology happens quicker than patent offices can react.  It is
time this stopped, not by attacking the latest problem area, but 
addressing and correcting the patent examination process itself.  But
on logical and ethical grounds, I reject separating out software for
special attentions.  These problems affect all areas of technology, and
and probably will have the same solutions (other than outright bans).

Those in the free software movement might want to break out of their
shells and talk to researchers and developers in other areas, like
biotech.  Their complaints, their actual suffering, are far greater,
than what is happening in software.  Just look at the complaints 
coming out of the Human Genome projects.  It would be of more benenfit
to more people to harass the energies against software patents against
all problems areas of patenting.  A tougher fight, but one that will
have more lasting impact.

Give it some thought.

Greg "The Troll" Aharonian