[Patents] Bessen & Maskin reply on software patent paper

[Jim Bessen jbessen@researchoninnovation.org]

> > In other words, if you lose the present battle, all is not lost. The
> > battleground just shifts to one over the practical implementation of IP.
> > However, if you argue that software patents are wrong on principle, and
> > then you lose, it will be difficult to build support and continue.
>
> I do not fully agree with you.
>
>  Many of us feel themselves right in fighting IP for software because
> of
> economical evidence that they are detrimental for SMEs, which represent
> more
> than 60 % of the jobs in the area, and should thus be preserved.
> Evidences of
> the harmfulness of patents in general (and not only software patents)
> for SMEs
> have been collected independently (see for instance
> http://info.sm.umist.ac.uk/esrcip/background.htm ;).

All I am trying (poorly) to express is the idea that the arguments about
patent policy should be based on empirical evidence applied to practical
problems of implementation. This is what you have just done. This is what
the pro-patent forces do not do  because they do not have the evidence on
their side.

> If we lose on this battlefield, we can still work on how to make the
> system less harmful. But in no way should we base our strategy on the
> assumption
> that we will lose. We cannot say that a system is detrimental and at the
> same
> time argue on how to improve it. It would be a failure in terms of
> communication.
>

I agree. But base your arguments against patents on evidence that patents,
as currently implemented, have not been beneficial. If you argue instead
that patents under all possible implementations are inherently evil (Greg's
phrase), then you exclude the support of people like Greg and you limit your
options if you do lose.