From epa98@doc.ic.ac.uk  Wed May 23 09:06:01 2001
From: epa98@doc.ic.ac.uk (Edward Avis)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 09:06:01 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [Patents] Re: Pro Software Patents = Illegal
In-Reply-To: <20010523001701.DFAAA108E1@stabilite.aful.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.32.0105230857460.17566-100000@owl.doc.ic.ac.uk>

>From: "Ronald J Riley" <rjriley@rjriley.com>

>Subject: [Patents] Re: Pro Software Patents = Illegal

>So you are now acknowledging that there are real software inventions
>which you have seen being covered by patents.

Yes, there are some.  Most software patents are trivial (ie, any
programmer would consider them too obvious to be worth patenting) or
else patents on an entire problem space.  Look at the European swpat
horror gallery for examples.  But there are indeed some patents which
relate to difficult work.

The question is, is it economically beneficial for the government to
intervene and grant monopolies on those works?  Do the benefits
outweigh the costs?  Remember that the patent system is a creation of
government, set up to 'promote progress in science and the useful arts'.
Do software patents meet this test?

><<There is no good reason for honest patent professionals to tolerate the
>parasitic acitvity of some asocials who are invading the field of pure
>abstraction and degrading the software industry, sucking away its
>lifeblood by turning it into a field for their litigation business.>>
>
>Such a telling disclosure.  You are admitting that you think that
>others inventions should be socialized for your and your colleagues
>benefit.

I don't think that's what he admitted.  But what we are saying is that
there is no case for _automatically_ granting patent monopolies on
software techniques.  Any such extension of the patent system must be
justified by clear evidence that it is beneficial.

We're not opposed to people making money from software.  But software
patents _prevent_ innovators from making money, they make it _harder_ to
write and sell new software, because of the increased risks of lawsuits
and the extra hoops you must jump through.  You can't write any
worthwhile program without infringing on dozens of patents, and even if
they prove to be invalid, they are still a threat to the small
developer.

So far on this list I have not seen an argument from you that the
government's granting of 20-year patent monopolies for software furthers
progress in science or the useful arts.  You said that you yourself had
done well from certain patents you filed; but can you point to any
economic studies showing that the patent system, on balance, benefits
users of software (businesses as well as individuals)?  If not, it would
be better for the government not to interfere, not to hand out these
artificial monopolies, and leave software development to the free
market.

-- 
Ed Avis
epa98@doc.ic.ac.uk



