Re(4): flow chart for a law [was: Re(2): [Patents] newsscan: Software patent limits 'go too far']

["Sylvain Perchaud" <sylvain@europe-shareware.org>(via Sylvain Perchaud <sylvain@europe-shareware.org>)]

Le jeudi 23 octobre 2003, à 11:52, Jean-Baptiste Soufron a écrit:

>> Of course. But in this case the reform intends to create wealth. That
>> needs to be proved.
>
>Agreed, but this is specific to this case I believe. And the debate is
>not just only about economics. I am not sure if it's even really first
>about economics.

The patent system was created to foster innovation and to give back the
knowledge to the society. If software patents fail to achieve both goals
they are useless and costly for the economic system.


>> Economists have only to study what is the impact of software patents
>> on innovation (and current studies conclude that it is negative).
>> Courts can then rely on these studies to take their decisions.
>> Empirical evidence is already available thanks to the (bad) USA
>> experience.
>
>Is innovation the only point to take in consideration?

It's by far the most important.


>What about the judicial security of software industry?

Software patents are antonymous to judicial security.


> What about the
>interest of trade as patents allow an easy licensing system? etc. etc.

Copyright does already that, just see how many european shareware
authors/companies licensed their technology to large companies (e.g.
Opera libraries are now included in Adobe and Macromedia products, .rar
compression libraries...).


>Yes but creation of wealth is not everything :-)
>At least, I hope that you don't assume that wealth=money.

Patents have to foster innovation and economic growth.
Of course it's has to be about money, not for the sake of erecting
Pentagon-size buildings to costly (for the economic agents)
administrations like the EPO.

If we can have a better economic growth without software patents, we've
to refuse them.



--
Sylvain Perchaud
Tel : +33 (0) 674 758 551
http://www.europe-shareware.org