[Patents] No point in everybody agreeing in a discussion

[phm@a2e.de (PILCH Hartmut)]

> I will agree with Luuk, although I am sure that some of mr Sobolewski's
> comments are due to cultural differences, I don't think that there is
> anything to be gained by not talking to your opponents or allies, and we
> have both on this list.

Our problem is that we have a lack of fair opponents who try to be
constructive.  The argumentation of Greg, Pierre Breese, John Smith and
others is reiterative to such a degree, that I am in danger of becoming
more and more manichean.  Even the association with slavemaster sophistry
then no longer seems far-fetched.

Only very recently did I finally come across one software patent proponent
whom I was able to respect.  He was a head of a company that was
apparently is profiting a lot from a few patents it holds, and which is
pursuing some intense development work in specialised areas.  Although I
am not sure they really could not do as well without a patent system, I
found that this company boss at least had a point here and there and that
he was ready to listen to other people's points and to learn something.
In short he had a scientific mind.  It turned out that one of his reasons
for proposing software patents was his discontent with artificial
distinctions between software and circuits which are equally based on
innovation in pure logics but merely represent a different implementation.
This was intellectually unsatisfying to him, and he was outraged at the
ineptness of patent bureaucrats.  However, when discussing about the
"natural forces vs logic" borderline, he actually found that
intellectually appealing and said that he would have respected it, if
patent officials had explained it to him in that way.  He also said that
he sees a problem in unleashing the patent system as it stands today
on the software industry.

So apparently the result is that whenever you meet some opponents with an
open mind, you are in danger of converting them, thus again reducing the
number of competent opponents, whom we so badly need in this discussion.

However I am sure I didn't convert my opponent after that one discussion.
His company is built on patents and he will continue to cling to the idea
of software patents for the time being.  But at least he has preserved a
curious mind and that may start wandering into unpredictable directions.

-phm