[Patents] Re: Patents digest, Vol 1 #445 - 6 msgs

[mattias.lundstrom@digitalroute.com (Mattias Lundstrom)]

Gregory Aharonian <srctran@world.std.com> wrote:
> An interesting economic question Hartmut raises.  All areas of patenting
> have problems (I agree) that need to be justified (I agree it is useful
> to reexamine the merits of patenting).  The question is, are the
> economic disruptions of software patents, when balanced, very badly
> in disfavor of software patents.

Almost correct!
Am I dreaming or did Greg actually concede a point here?

However - why "very badly in disfavor"? Should not just "in disfavor"
be enough?

> 
> I.E., as a percentage of industry incomes, are software patents leading
> to altered allocations much greater than in other industries?  And/or
> are software patents leading to altered corporate activities much
> greater than in other industries?  And/or are software patents leading
> to altered corporate R&D investments much greater than in other
> industries?
> 
> Show me statistically reliable data confirming these three domination
> economic domiantion effects, and you will have a case for treating
> software patenting differently.  And to date, there is no such data
> (and Bessen's models didn't consider cross-industry comparisons).

Forget about the religious "all areas should be treated the same"
argument!

There has always been limitations on what have been considered 
protectable by patents. For example musical or literary techniques
has AFAIK never been considered for patents.

<rant>
So there is no absolute natural law that all areas of human creativity
should be patentable. In fact the whole patent system is just a legal
construct and it can be constructed in whatever way society agrees to
construct it. If some lawmaker managed to get a majority for the case
that no patent could be granted for any process involving dairy products
then this would be the law. In the same way if they decide that no
SW could be patented then this would be the law. 
Is there something difficult to understand about this?
</rant>

Also:
Since historically SW Pats have not been a strong influence in the
industry because of lenient enforcement as well as limited knowledge
about patents in the industry there is not that much statistic data
to draw conclusions from. Especially considering that the SW industry
has developed in a very dramatic way unparallelled in human history.
(AFAIK - perhaps someone has a counterexample?)

Instead industry knowledge and common sense can be combined to reason
about the expected future in the two cases with and without SW Patents.
Those who believe there is at least great risks in granting the
extension of the patent system to SW should definitely be against
SW Pats since it is much easier to later grant the right to get SW Pats
than it would be to abolish them. At least People would be very upset 
if the laws were changed to retroactively invalidate their patents.

Therefore it is clearly the responsibility of the pro-patent guys
to prove that SW Pats would be good and not the other way around.

So Greg - could you show me statistically reliable data that shows
that patents have been good for the software industry?

> 
> So if you are serious about this issue, why not start lobbying the
> EC to fund a study to measure the effects of patents in a variety
> of industries to see if indeed software patents are being orders
> more disruptive?

Greg, please change your arguments or at least vary them somewhat.
This is becoming ridiculous.

-- Mattias