Re: [Patents] Software Patents: The Patent Trap

[Seth Johnson <seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org>]

Well, Gregory:

I would surmise that you somehow overlooked the rest of Ms.
Gasperson's comments, except that "Tough luck" seems to be
such an apt summation of your entire outlook on the
questions surrounding the issue of software patents.  While
Ms. Gasperson very ably illustrates and brings home some
very incisive concerns, neither she nor anyone else can
possibly be a match for that kind of response, and
unfortunately it is only with the most concerted effort that
software patents will be effectively resisted in the face of
such a callous disregard for people's freedoms to exercise
logic freely by means of the use of their logic devices.

Seth Johnson


Gregory Aharonian wrote:
> 
> An idiotic article.  For example,
> >What if at the very same time she wrote her program, another company
> >filed patent applications on the very same processes and algorithms
> >she used?
> 
> Tough luck.  A chemist inventing a new chemical has to worry about the
> same threat, another company filing a patent application first on the
> same chemical or chemical process.  A biologist inventing a new
> biotech process has to worry about the same threat, another company
> filing a patent application first on the same biotech material or
> process.  Same for the electronics engineer, designing a new circuit.
> What happens if someone files patent applications on the same circuit
> first?
> 
> So all this lame example proves is that software is yet one more
> technical industry that has to deal with the promises and perils
> of patents.  There is nothing special or holy about software -
> just another technology to be patented.
> 
> Problems? Sure. Problems with patent quality, problems with the costs
> of patent litigation.  But problems shared by biologists, chemists,
> electrical engineers, software engineers, etc.  Software people just
> cry about it more.  Solution.  Improve the quality of issued patents
> (a solvable problem) and lower the costs of using the legal process
> to correct the mistakes that do issue (a less solvable problem).
> 
> But if you are going to attack software patents, come up with a less
> pathetic analogy.
> 
> Greg Aharonian

-- 

[CC] Counter-copyright:
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cc/cc.html