-- [Patents] Re: BT and Hyperlink patent

[PILCH Hartmut phm@a2e.de]

> >Thus demonstrating that invalid or dubious patents (since there are so
> >many of them) are just as much as a menace as valid ones (in terms of
> >causing hassles).
> 
> I completely agree.  

So you do agree that valid ones are just as much a menace.  Good.

> But once again this problem of software patents also happens in other
> areas of technology.  It is not a basis to treat software patents
> differently. 

So you do agree that the software industry suffers.  Good.
Comparisons to other fields don't help alleviate this suffering.

> In fact, I suspect the biotechnology industry suffers more than the
> software industry.

>From my experience with biotech patent affairs I have the impression that
they enjoy the game of patenting.  Even if some patents are trivial, they
allow a company to accumulate some assets just by laboratory research.  
Product development is restricted and instead there is a competition of
free flowing information.  A nice shift of game rules.

In software we can't enjoy such a shift.  Everything is information
anyway.  If "product development" is restricted, then so is information.

> Bad patents are inexcusable.

Software patents are bad patents.

> In all fields, including software.  So let's get the
> patent offices to improve the quality of their examination operations.
 
Who is this peer group you are talking to?
Your news show of improving the examination process has been heroic for
ten years, but it has failed.
How many other heroes are there on this list who are willing to give up
software development and spend their time following in your footsteps?

-phm