From phm@a2e.de  Tue Dec 19 20:16:01 2000
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 21:16:01 +0100 (CET)
From: PILCH Hartmut phm@a2e.de
Subject: [Patents] monopoly/publicity contradiction?

> Since software is primarily a mathematical undertaking, surely the best
> solution is to provide both a description and a working example ?

exactly
 
> > > Programs have a dual nature, which defies the normal distinction between
> > > monopoly and publicity.
> > > Do you understand the point now?
> > 
> > No.  But not for want of effort on your part, or mine.
> 
> I'll have to side with Mr Probert on this one - although programs do have
> elements of invention, science, art and literature intertwined - for the
> purposes of patent disclosure, there is no real problem !
> In fact, the more detail the better as it gives people more chance to
> understand and utilize the patent when it expires...

Maybe you didn't understand.
The problem is that by delivering a complete and accurate description of
a software innovation you will largely take away the monopoly effect of
the patent.

Even if patent offices don't require that full-value reference
implementations be included as embodiments, they could hardly prevent
someone else from writing a more complete manual on patents and including
such referemce implementations, accessible via http-rpc and all modern
means of hypertext and literary programming.

Then referencing these illustrative examples from within some corba-based
program would become an infringement.  So you'd again get the debate about
"freedom for links" etc.

You don't see a contradiction between monpoly and publication yet?
The whole basic idea of the patent system is that you can separate the
two.  With software you can't.  Or at least the separation becomes very
thin and arbitrary.

-phm






