| |||||||||||||
Lack of patent protection did impede progressLack of patent protection did impede progressPosted Jun 21, 2012 0:26 UTC (Thu) by jreiser (subscriber, #11027)In reply to: EFF Launches New Patent Reform Project to Defend Innovation by slashdot Parent article: EFF Launches New Patent Reform Project to Defend Innovation Is there any proof or even indication ... would not have been conceived without patent protection? Yes, there is, if you consider the aspects of reduction to practice, publication and dissemination. Prior to the late 1970s, method patents via software were difficult to obtain, and special-purpose hardware was very expensive in time and money. This significantly impeded the publication and dissemination of new ideas, methods, and algorithms in software during those years. For instance, what is now known as LZ77 was described in detail by Ziv at least eight years earlier, but suppressed from publication because patent protection was effectively unavailable.
(Log in to post comments)
Lack of patent protection did impede progress Posted Jun 21, 2012 1:06 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
Come on. LZ-like algorithms were invented separately multiple times - there's nothing complex in the idea of a sliding window. Huffman algorithm was published in freaking 1951, and it leads directly to an idea of the dictionary with a sliding window.
Hell, _I_ invented one variation in high school absolutely independently for my game on ZX-Spectrum and that means there's nothing complex in that.
Lack of patent protection did impede progress Posted Jun 21, 2012 1:57 UTC (Thu) by jjs (guest, #10315) [Link]
?? It was described in IEEE Proceedings in 1977. do you have proof Liv invented it 8 years earlier?
Lack of patent protection did impede progress Posted Jun 21, 2012 2:56 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
Maybe he did. But if he did and then decided to keep a secret because he couldn't get a patent for it all it proves is that it's possible to be really smart and really damn stupid at the same time.
Lack of patent protection did impede progress Posted Jun 21, 2012 13:38 UTC (Thu) by jreiser (subscriber, #11027) [Link]
In 1969 I was a student of a professor who received a copy of the private preprint of Ziv's paper.
Lack of patent protection did impede progress Posted Jun 21, 2012 13:43 UTC (Thu) by gioele (subscriber, #61675) [Link]
>> Is there any proof or even indication ... would not have been conceived without patent protection?
> Yes, there is, if you consider the aspects of reduction to practice, publication and dissemination. Prior to the late 1970s, method patents via software were difficult to obtain, and special-purpose hardware was very expensive in time and money. This significantly impeded the publication and dissemination of new ideas, methods, and algorithms in software during those years.
Does this mean that the drawers of European universities are full of unpublished algorithms waiting to be patented?
Lack of patent protection did impede progress Posted Jun 21, 2012 13:53 UTC (Thu) by hummassa (subscriber, #307) [Link]
It means drawers of Earth's universities and schools are full of every single algorithm that will or will not be patented in the next 100 years. And that is *why* software patents are pure evil and pure B.S.
Lack of patent protection did impede progress Posted Jun 21, 2012 14:56 UTC (Thu) by gioele (subscriber, #61675) [Link]
Let me rephrase that. (Where is the "Edit comment" button?)
>> Is there any proof or even indication ... would not have been conceived without patent protection?
> Yes, there is, if you consider the aspects of reduction to practice, publication and dissemination. Prior to the late 1970s, method patents via software were difficult to obtain, and special-purpose hardware was very expensive in time and money. This significantly impeded the publication and dissemination of new ideas, methods, and algorithms in software during those years.
Does this mean that the drawers of European universities are full of beautiful algorithms left unpublished because they cannot be patented? It is hard to believe.
|
|||||||||||||