[Patents] Hardware/software codesign

[Didier Metzen didier.metzen1@libertysurf.fr]

Yes something like that.
Even in the classic industry I believe that 20 years is too long in many 
cases.
The fear to loose the technology with the inventor is quite zero now.

I think that the duration of protection should be different and based on 
what's
make economical sense for the society.

By the way, I think that everybody has agreed that on software 20 years 
doesn't
make sense, even persons that want to be able to patent software.
The question would be: how long. 1 year, 3 years? Could be a way for the US to
start changing their law (ie reducing the duration of protection)

Didier

Robert Bielik a écrit:

> "Classical" industry has evolved pretty well, wouldn't you say ? We now have
> cars that run pretty well, computers that are fairly speedy. If this is in
> spite of "classical" patents is of course impossible to state. However there
> is one item regarding patents that I personally think do not apply to
> software:
>
> - 20 years of protection. Just think of it. 20 years of protection for a sw
> patent when in sw, within 1 year, everything is "obvious". Absurd. Totally
> absurd.
>
> And the model from the USA (which patent lawyers wish to apply in Europe)
> shows already that sw patents are NOT beneficial to society. If small to
> medium sized companies go under due to being sued for infringement, even
> when not justified, I think that is HIGHLY non-beneficial to society as a
> whole.
>
> Robert Bielik
> SSE
> Gyros Microlabs
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Didier Metzen [mailto:didier.metzen1@libertysurf.fr]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 1:44
> > To: Robert Bielik
> > Cc: 'patents@liberte.aful.org'
> > Subject: Re: [Patents] Hardware/software codesign
> >
> >
> > OK where is the answer "are classical patents beneficial to
> > society today"?
> >
> > By the way, two companies are now trying to get fees from
> > their patent on MPEG
> > algorithm. One is german, the second is french.
> > Does somebody know where these patents have been granted?
> >
> > Didier
> >
> >
> >
> > Robert Bielik a écrit:
> >
> > > Ed Avis wrote:
> > >
> > > >It's an impressive list of tools for designing hardware,
> > but it doesn't
> > > >say anything about whether patents on computer programs
> > are of benefit
> > > >to society.
> > >
> > > Which also is the ONLY valid consideration whether patents
> > on SW should be
> > > or
> > > not be. The argument that because patents on mechanical
> > devices are granted,
> > > sw
> > > patents should likewise be granted is the classical
> > "sandbox" argument: "If
> > > you have it,
> > > I must have it also". Mr Aharonian as well as other
> > proponents fail to
> > > answer the
> > > one and ONLY question: IS SW PATENTS BENEFICIAL TO SOCIETY ???
> > >
> > > Robert Bielik
> > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > Gyros Microlabs
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Patents maillist  -  Patents@liberte.aful.org
> > > http://liberte.aful.org/mailman/listinfo/patents
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Patents maillist  -  Patents@liberte.aful.org
> http://liberte.aful.org/mailman/listinfo/patents