[Patents] American Inventor Coalition / was Re: Software and

[kodama@netcourrier.com (kodama@netcourrier.com)]

> 1) is =22software engineering=22 only =22programming=22 ?
> (versus architectures, protocols etc.)

> Specify further=21 I don't really understand your question?
> What do you mean by =22programming=22?

Ok, if you meant =22programming=22 as software engineering in general, inc=
luding design. I am ok with your and my question is a bad one.

However, in another message, you talked about =22copyright as a way to pro=
tect software programming=22. So, I guessed that you were only talking abo=
ut coding (since copyright is always for coding and not for design).

That is a point: we need to be very careful about terminology.

> The company would most likely want to keep their good software
> designers so they will not go through the code so thoroghly

No need to go into the code : the patents are, for most of them, claiming =
about designs, specification.
So the cost to study the existing patents is not as enourmous as you may s=
ay.

But anyway, it is for sure a costly operation. And it is a strategic choic=
e for the company and problem of risk assesment.


> 2) could you cite some major R&D employers of software programmers
> who are against software patents ?
> First I would say that all companies working with free software are
> most likely against software patents.

I am afraid I must disagree.
As you are swedish, I may cite Ericsson as an user (and  funder =21)  of s=
ome free softwares and a major patent owner.


> Apart from that I consider the question to be somewhat wrongly asked.

Well... it depends on the point of view : to my mind, my question was for =
better asked than your reformulation. :-)
Your question is perhaps also a good one, but this is not mine =21


> The employers are most often not aware about the real problems with
> software patents as the employers themselves are not computer
> scientists. To really understand the serious problems with software
> patents you need to be a rather experienced computer scientist.

Well... what you are point out is that management and engineering have dif=
ferent points of view ?  =

Well, that is right and not new.
But, good or bad, Management is now ruling the world.

I would say this is bad, but we can do nothing about it.

For management, software patents do have a big pertinence.
For instance, if a software company is negociating with a hardware company=
 for creating a joint venture, the IP issue will, sooner or later, be rise=
n.
Then, if the software company can only tell :=22 I am sorry I have not por=
tfolio because software is no more patentable=22, it will be in a bad posi=
tion.

The fact that software engineer have problems to detect if they are infrin=
ging a 3d party patent is a problem, but with little relevance. I think 90=
% of them prefer to take this risk and to face this 3d party when wanting =
to enforce its right, with its own portfolio (hopefully stronger).


> If I have had to think about software patents when programming I
> would probably have chosen another career. In my master thesis

I have no knowledge about a company having asked to its employees to produ=
ce pieces of software 100% sure of being out of any 3d party patents.

What could be possible is a management asking =22this patent is blocking u=
s. Please provide a solution to overcome it=22. But I think this could be =
something motivating enough for the software engineers and anyway somethin=
g innovation producing.


> The question you should ask is merely:
> How many experienced software designers are pro software patents?

Who cares ?

I am sorry: this questions is intentionaly provoking, but the fact is that=
 the business is ruled by investissors, not by software designers.

Again, I am not telling that this is a good thing (I simply do not know =21=
), but according to this matter of fact, software patents are necessary.

So, what you are wanting, you anti software patents, is to change completl=
y the world.
Well, why not ?   But this issue goes beyong this side-problem of software=
 patents.

> So I guess the good programmers will probably quit if they have to
> deal with software patents, leaving the company with the less skilled
> programmers who don't yet understand the problem.

Uuu...well, that is supposing that research centers are made of less skill=
ed programmers ? Well, perhaps, but I won't subscribe to this opinion

S.C

----- La messagerie itin=E9rante sans abonnement NetCourrier -----
Web: www.netcourrier.com - Minitel : 3615 NETCOURRIER
T=E9l=E9phone: 08 36 69 00 21