X-Sympa-To: patents
Return-Path: <pelegrin@labri.fr>
Delivered-To: patents@aful.org
Received: from iona.labri.fr (iona.labri.fr [147.210.8.143])
	by stabilite.aful.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2027E57B7D
	for <patents@aful.org>; Fri, 14 May 2004 12:22:23 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (guismo.drimm.u-bordeaux1.fr [147.210.36.243])
	by localhost.labri.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 914E313C0C;
	Fri, 14 May 2004 11:53:42 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from iona.labri.fr ([147.210.8.143])
 by localhost (guismo [147.210.36.243]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP
 id 15620-04-5; Fri, 14 May 2004 11:53:41 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from labri.fr (brol.labri.fr [147.210.9.226])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by iona.labri.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F1D513C08;
	Fri, 14 May 2004 11:53:41 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <40A4B21E.5070702@labri.fr>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 13:48:46 +0200
From: Francois PELLEGRINI <pelegrin@labri.fr>
Organization: INRIA & LaBRI, Universite Bordeaux I
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030630
X-Accept-Language: fr, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Flemming Bjerke <flem@bjerke.dk>
Cc: patents@aful.org
Subject: Re: [Patents] Reponse du ministre de l'industrie par rapport aux
 brevets logiciels
References: <1084520591.2722.4208.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200405141145.06474.flem@bjerke.dk>
In-Reply-To: <200405141145.06474.flem@bjerke.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at u-bordeaux1.fr
X-Validation-by: pelegrin@labri.fr


Re all,

Flemming Bjerke wrote:
> Fredag 14 maj 2004 09:43 wrote Denis Chalon about [Patents] Reponse du 
> ministre de l'industrie par rapport aux brevets logiciels:
> 
>> Lorsqu'une entreprise du secteur logiciel souhaite proteger sa
>>propriete intellectuelle, elle garde le "code source" secret.
> 
> In 2002 the main argument that the Danish Minister of Industry defended 
> software patents with, was that the alternative to patenting software is 
> keeping software innovations secret. That would hamper innovation and SME's 
> opportunities. 
> 
> Just to point to how your argument could be twisted.

But keeping the code secret has noting to do with
keeping the ideas secret. I can have the ideas when
looking at an existing software, and I do not
need the code at all if I think that I can re-do
it more efficiently by myself.

Copyright monopolizes code. Patents monopolize
ideas.

Having code secret gives the first seller an advantage,
while preserving competition.
Having a patent gives the patent holder complete control
over the field, destroying competition.



				f.p.



