Re: [Patents] Phil Salin on Software Patents

[Russell McOrmond <russell@flora.ca>]

  Replying to Greg, but written for the more open minded readers.

On Sun, 31 Aug 2003, Gregory Aharonian wrote:

> Software is just another field of engineering where systems, processes,
> methods and structures are created. 

  Greg stating his personal opinion over and over again as if it were fact
doesn't make it any more true.

  Greg refuses to acknowledge the difference between methods used to
manipulate nature to create a product, and treating the methods themselves
as a product separate from manipulations of nature. There are many ways to
state this difference, and many different people stating them, all of
which are ignored by Greg and other "one size fits all" patent extremists.

  Independent creation is a defense for copyright.  Couple this with
fact/expression separation and this makes the free speech arguments
against patents entirely unrelated to arguments around copyright.  They
are two very different areas of law.

> So given copyright's general impotence for protecting software, any
> calls to ban all software patents is little more than a call to ban
> all protection for software.

  Greg's opposition to the protection of the creative rights of software
creators is quite obvious in this forum.  Please do not be fooled by his
attempt to deflect things as if it was someone else that is guilty of
this, or that he was trying to protect creators' rights.

  Software patents do not protect the rights of software creators, they
oppose them.  Software patents artificially treat software as it if was
similar to hardware, and imposed "hardware like"  business models onto
software.  There is absolutely no reason to impose government enforcement
of the treatment of software as something that is "manufactured",
distributed and sold on a per-unit basis.  I will always oppose
big-government intervention into what should be a free market and impose
such extreme form of business model regulation.

  Software patents greatly harm the independence of software creators from
centralized work-for-hire "software manufacturing" firms where the actual
software creators are not offered any rights at all.

  Copyright protects the expression of software quite well, and offers
creators choice of employment environments, business models,
methodologies, and so-on.  The fact that copyright does not create a
monopoly on the methods used within the software, allowing for independent
innovation and re-implementation, is its greatest public policy feature --
not a case of impotence.

---
 Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/> 
 Governance software that controls ICT, automates government policy, or
 electronically counts votes, shouldn't be bought any more than 
 politicians should be bought.  -- http://www.flora.ca/russell/