[Patents] Black and white

[phm@a2e.de (PILCH Hartmut)]

> If it turns out that in some cases current copyright offers less
> "protection" than seems appropriate, there are several ways to solve the
> problem:
>
> (1) fiddle around with copyright:
>     - whenever someone publishes a source first, put the burden of proof
>       on the plagiator.  Require that he must do something really original
>       and creative, based on understanding underlying problems but
>       completely "reinvented", not just transscribed to another form
>       if expression.
>     - be more strict during the first few years of copyright than during
>       later years.  be more strict when the copier is aiming at a
>       competing product than when he is striving for compatibility
> (2) formulate the above and some more principles into a specialised
>     software copyright (sui generis approach)

Of course there is also the possibility of just finding other means to
finance research.  E.g. accept that the best research is public-financed
and usually less more important research comes out of the R&D departments
of companies, where it is usually financed by advantages in oligopolistic
competition.  Oligopolistic competition is the basic rule of modern
"market economy", with or without patents.  And large companies are forced
to conduct such research, with or without patents.  Bessen & Maskin showed
that software patents did not induce more research even in the large
patent-holding companies of the field.  And others such as Fritz Machlup
and Greg Aharonian have pointed out that this applies to most hardware
fields as well.

> Patents are not a heritage of human history, shaped by many arbitrary

Sorry, this "not" was a bad typo.

> factors. I can see no reason in the world why the patent system should
> carry any merit with itself that might qualify it for being applicable to
> software.
...