1+1 (pat. pending) - Mathematics, Software and Free Speech (Groklaw)

Posted Apr 26, 2011 21:04 UTC (Tue) by Unladen (guest, #72953)
Parent article: 1+1 (pat. pending) - Mathematics, Software and Free Speech (Groklaw)

Software patents transfer control from engineers to the business decision makers that run companies.
Engineers should join unions to collectively bargain for the right to retain title to their inventions.
Engineers (LWN readers) don't object to the existence of software patents, really. They object to businesses using them against technical people.

1+1 (pat. pending) - Mathematics, Software and Free Speech (Groklaw)

Posted Apr 26, 2011 21:10 UTC (Tue) by tao (subscriber, #17563) [Link]

Speak for yourself. I certainly do oppose software patents. And hardware patents. Because I oppose government imposed monopolies.

No, I object to software patents

Posted Apr 26, 2011 21:49 UTC (Tue) by david.a.wheeler (subscriber, #72896) [Link]

I read LWN, and I object to software patents, period. Patents - including software patents - should benefit society. Since software patents do not benefit society, they need to be abolished, immediately. Software patents are an industrial-era construct that make no sense in an information age.

1+1 (pat. pending) - Mathematics, Software and Free Speech (Groklaw)

Posted Apr 26, 2011 22:04 UTC (Tue) by coriordan (guest, #7544) [Link] (2 responses)

I object to patents being used against software developers. It doesn't matter if the attack comes from a business person or a technical person.

1+1 (pat. pending) - Mathematics, Software and Free Speech (Groklaw)

Posted Apr 27, 2011 21:28 UTC (Wed) by coriordan (guest, #7544) [Link] (1 responses)

Actually, maybe our points of view can be merged.

Software developers don't like being attacked by businesses (with patents, for example). And software developers do like interacting with other engineers.

I think we agree on that much. And then I'd add that once someone (a programmer or whatever) acquires a patent and starts using it aggressively, they switch from being considered an engineer to being considered a business.

If you go with that logic, then we're saying the same thing when you say that software developers simply don't like patents being used by businesses (because any aggressive patent holder is a "business"), and when I say that software developers simply don't like patents being used against them.

1+1 (pat. pending) - Mathematics, Software and Free Speech (Groklaw)

Posted Apr 27, 2011 21:38 UTC (Wed) by nybble41 (subscriber, #55106) [Link]

That's an interesting argument. Unfortunately, it amounts to saying that engineers are OK with software patents only to the extent that said patents are guaranteed to never be enforced. In which case, of course, they might as well not exist. Why add needless complexity?

1+1 (pat. pending) - Mathematics, Software and Free Speech (Groklaw)

Posted Apr 27, 2011 7:59 UTC (Wed) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784) [Link]

With (1) and (2), you sounded like you were a civilized person who I might or might not have agreed with. (3) proves you a troll. Go away.

1+1 (pat. pending) - Mathematics, Software and Free Speech (Groklaw)

Posted Apr 27, 2011 11:11 UTC (Wed) by Seegras (guest, #20463) [Link] (1 responses)

I certainly object to government granted monopolies if they are detrimental to society. Which patents are. Always. All of them. They were established as an experiment in the 18th century, but as one found out they didn't work (see for instance the history of the steam-engine: One huge case of why patents are a total failure), it was too late. People started believing in the superstition that patents were somhow "good".

The only thing that helps is to abolish them completely. In the meantime, a ban on patents on mathematics (wich includes software) would at least be the lesser evil.

Seegras
(LWN reader and System Engineer)

1+1 (pat. pending) - Mathematics, Software and Free Speech (Groklaw)

Posted Apr 27, 2011 16:28 UTC (Wed) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link]

To the steam engine, add the aeroplane - the first aeroplane to fly did so in the US, yet within fifteen years the US was so badly behind it had to buy nearly all its warplanes from the British and the French.

And add pharmaceuticals !!! most patents and research go into incremental research aimed at keeping old drugs "in patent", and not towards research for new drugs.

Add the light bulb - Edison's patent was for a carbon-filament bulb - filed LONG after he had seen a British tungsten-filament bulb. Which one was it that took over the world, again?

Pretty much all patents have been a disaster - not all I'll admit, but most have.

Cheers,
Wol