Re: [Patents] newsscan: Software patent limits 'go too far'

[old.timer@tiscali.co.uk]

>James Heald wrote:

>Patents are supposed to be about allowing a return on an
>investment, to encourage innovation.

>Copyright does this for computer programs, so patents aren't
>needed.


If that were so (ie. copyright does this for computer programs), people
wouldn't bother applying for patents for computer programs.  Not least because
copyright is free, and lasts much longer. Also, people wouldn't get so worked
up about patents if they were simply a short-term, expensive alternative
to copyright. It is because patents provide a much broader protection that
we don't like them. While we write our own code, we can completely ignore
everyone else's copyright. But we can't ignore their patents because we
might be infringing them without knowing it.

I'm happy to support any campaign to stop software patents, but I'm not
comfortable burying my head in the sand and pretending that they don't already
exist and/or are illegal.

Seems to me that if we pretend software patents don't exist or are illegal,
we can't complain about all the problems they are causing. And if we can't
complain about the problems they are causing, how can we object to anything
that maintains the status quo.