On TechRepublic: Five super-secret features in Windows 7
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 5 of 75:
Next »
« Previous
Very simple
There is no way that software should be patentable. When I was in college (a long, long time ago) there was no such thing as a software patent. Software was protected by copyright law only. Somewhere along the line in the last 31 years that has changed. Why?

I shouldn't be allowed to copy someone's code, but why can't I write my own code that accomplishes the same result?
Posted by: vferrara   Posted on: 07/20/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use
Reply to Story Reply to Message

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

What happens  zijiang | 07/19/04
The market will most likely be wiped out...  Linux User 147560 | 07/19/04
Patent system run amok!  wshwe | 07/19/04
Agreed, but...  Martin Marvinski | 07/20/04
Very simple  vferrara | 07/20/04
I agree, to a point..  d_jedi | 07/20/04
Here's how  Update victim | 07/20/04
Why not patent software?  d_jedi | 07/20/04
Simple  Fred Fredrickson | 07/19/04
I don't think so.  doe_z | 07/19/04
it depends on how...  ryusen | 07/20/04
methods of plugins?  NemesisNL | 07/20/04
re:  eLurker | 07/21/04
the guy is a admited ms hater  V Sanders | 07/20/04
Patent abuse?  rapson | 07/20/04
The patent holder looses in that instance  quietLee | 07/20/04
Nothing, actually  IT_User | 07/20/04
the courts may decide differently  eLurker | 07/20/04
not true  NemesisNL | 07/20/04
id imagine  eLurker | 07/20/04
Patent term  IT_User | 07/20/04
The 20 was the extension to the 17, it's 37 now(NT)  voska | 07/20/04
37 Years  voska | 07/20/04
Patents and copyrights are different  IT_User | 07/20/04
Antitrust?  d_jedi | 07/20/04
So what?  Zen37 | 07/20/04
Most likely, nothing (except for Macromedia)  Eggs Ackley_z | 07/20/04
They can't do that  quietLee | 07/20/04
Oh no?  Eggs Ackley_z | 07/20/04
we will see  eLurker | 07/20/04
trademarks...  ryusen | 07/20/04
Nope  IT_User | 07/20/04
Depends on what Eolas wants to do  Robert Crocker | 07/20/04
resulting...  eLurker | 07/20/04
Lawsuits about what?  IT_User | 07/20/04
re:  eLurker | 07/20/04
Patents and OSS/GPL  rapson | 07/20/04
yeah  CobraA1 | 07/20/04
the problem  eLurker | 07/21/04
Browser fees  georgep_z | 07/19/04
That statement is about as good as the patent  el1jones | 07/20/04
Good way for them to get creamed  quietLee | 07/20/04
Patents are ba...bad. Microsoft is ba...bad.  Xunil_Sierutuf | 07/20/04
Give up  PmAc_z | 07/20/04
LOL, I'll look into that...  Xunil_Sierutuf | 07/20/04
Eloas Can't Show Bias  PottHead | 07/20/04
Patent licenses almost always show bias  Robert Crocker | 07/20/04
re:  eLurker | 07/20/04
re: re: :P  zkiwi | 07/20/04
ah, but  eLurker | 07/20/04
By "can't"  IT_User | 07/20/04
For once, I'm rooting for MS  el1jones | 07/20/04
Severely broken  Tim Patterson | 07/20/04
No,  d_jedi | 07/20/04
Does This Mean Microsoft Steals Code?  RobertoSalazar | 07/20/04
M$ does not steal code...they borrow it for a time  drichards1953 | 07/20/04
dos  eLurker | 07/20/04
FUD alert!  d_jedi | 07/20/04
no ... not in this case, anyway  eLurker | 07/20/04
Hey..  JustMe99_z | 07/20/04
(nt) Baseless claims about Microsoft? Time for another FUD alert!  d_jedi | 07/20/04
Makes you wish...  billywill | 07/20/04
PATENET != CODE  PmAc_z | 07/20/04
(NT) See my post "Here's how" above.  Update victim | 07/20/04
What's a "Patenet"?  Xunil_Sierutuf | 07/20/04
a net for pate? (nt)  eLurker | 07/21/04
The objective of U of Cal is  michael-t | 07/20/04
MS Finally Getting Theirs  itanalyst | 07/20/04
what?  eLurker | 07/20/04
um...  ryusen | 07/20/04
Eolas to get theirs  FilledOut | 07/20/04
Boo-hoo, the money, the code rewrites! Illegal is still illegal.  YuridaMan | 07/20/04
disagree  eLurker | 07/20/04
This shoudn't be patented in the first place.  CobraA1 | 07/20/04
killing a patent?  wessonjoe | 09/10/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement