[Patents] public interest and appropriation instinct

[Gregory Aharonian srctran@world.std.com]

>>And patents restrict freedom.

>One reason a few people here keep expressing uneasiness with this
>argumentation may be that it is so simple and clear.

And meaningless.  Software patents restrict the freedom of
software engineers no more or less than patents in other fields
restrict the freedom of engineers in those fields.  Worse, because
people in other fields have less to worry about for loss of 
freedoms through copyrights, which also restricts the freedom of
software engineers (and like it or not, the GPL also restricts
the freedom of programmers as well).

In terms of loss of freedom (which is a mostly unsubstantiated
charge leveled against software patents), biotech researchers
and developers probably suffer more loss of freedom than software
engineers.

Nothing beign stated here is rigorous enough to differentiate the
patentability of software from any other form of technology -
hypothetical losses of freedom, impediments to progress, threats
of lawsuit, representation as information, etc.  Software is just
the next technology in a series of technology that the patent
system has had a lot of problems digesting.

All of the arguments here then against software patents are equally
applicable to all other fields of technology, making these arguments
against the patent system as a whole.  That is an interesting argument
to make, which none of you have the guts to make, instead hiding
behind the banner of anti-software patenting.  And frankly, I think
many of you don't even like copyrights as well, which also restrict
freedom as well.   Heck, why not take it all the way and argue
against all forms of private property?  Oh yes, they tried that in
Europe, and it failed miserably.  I guess we Americans get to 
watch you guys do it all over again.  Pass the buttered popcorn.

Greg Aharonian