[Patents] Re: what rules promote progress?

[Luuk.van.Dijk@xs4all.nl (Luuk van Dijk)]

On Wed, 25 Jul 2001 20:05:49 Gregory Aharonian wrote:
> Hartmut asks:
> > Which rules do really promote the progress of science and the useful arts?

[SNIP]

> 
> If software patents are so bad to the software industry, you would think
> then that the US software industry would be in disasterous shape, unable
> to compete anywhere.  Quite the opposite.  And unable innovate.  Again,
> quite the opposite.
> 

You don't get in touch with the Real World(tm) often, do you?  A visit
to 
        http://www.fuckedcompany.com/ ;

might prove enlightening to the great shape the US software industy is in.
It is a site dedicated to the bursting of the .com bubble.  BTW, did I read
today that Lucent is about to cut 20.000 /more/ jobs than they already 
planned?

Not that either state of the industry has any logical connection with the
benefits of patents or lack thereof.

While we're trying to make points by pretending to use logic, I have some 
suggestive analogies that might count as logical proof by some peoples
standards.

        - between 1850 and 1910 the Netherlands did not acknowledge
patents, in the same period,  the Dutch Royal Philips N.V. blossomed 
into a world-class multinational, inventing lots of stuff already covered
by Edison's patents.

        - italy has no laws 'protecting' industrial design, and is 
recognised by designers all over the world as the mecca of that field.

Looks like logically conclusive evidence to me. But we digress.

Luuk van Dijk