On CHOW: Getting sloshed with the boss
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 37 of 40:
Next »
« Previous
Not quite
The real question, as recently studied by the SEC, and long debated by WIPO, PTO, EPO, JPO, AIPLA is whether software is inherently patentable. The U.S. experience shows how to concoct a dysfunctional system, but that in no way proves the converse.

Does the promise of a state-granted monopoly induce individuals or firms to invest time and capital in basic software research that they would not otherwise have done? If not, then it does not satisfy the premise of the underlying Constitutional clause and enabling legislation reflected in U.S. Code. The specialist bodies should draft legislation to clarify the intent. Previously the PTO had stood guard with its specific regulations, but the courts decided the Code was too generic to support PTO's stance. PTO simply threw in the towel rather than proposing to recraft either the legislation or its regulations and paid the price with debasement of its currency, the patent.

Time and experience have not been to kind to the position of the lawyers enriched by the current system. Agreed, it's time to get Congress of its duff and look at the question in depth. But to my mind the burden of proof should lie with those that premise a societal benefit from software patents.
Posted by: IT_User   Posted on: 11/24/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

If (and it's a big if) the patents...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/24/04
Where does it say otherwise?  IT_User | 11/24/04
Never said there was...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/24/04
When a bunch of lawyers come knocking on your door ...  P. Douglas | 11/24/04
Been there, done that.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/24/04
You are unbelievable! (NT)  P. Douglas | 11/24/04
Why? Because I deal in real business and you don't?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/24/04
I have my own company (NT)  P. Douglas | 11/24/04
And how many patents do you hold or applied for?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/24/04
it it not the quanity no-ax  JasonL31 | 11/26/04
You Are Being Just Plain Silly!  P. Douglas | 11/24/04
Yes you are, but that's ok, I understand.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/24/04
Whay should we be forced to spend money . . .  openMind | 11/29/04
I hope the above situation will finally start to get the attention ...  P. Douglas | 11/24/04
Really? How so?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/24/04
Past, present or future?  seosamh_z | 11/24/04
Go away? No. Reform? Absoluteley!  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/24/04
So I guess owning a patent makes you a big man. (NT)  P. Douglas | 11/24/04
I can see why you would think so. But no, I'm a businessman.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/24/04
So what?  seosamh_z | 11/24/04
Power to the people? PULEASE...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/24/04
People should be powerless?  seosamh_z | 11/25/04
All this B.S. from a farmboy  AbsolutelyNot | 11/29/04
Joe, you might as well  IT_User | 11/24/04
Patent holder disagrees  openMind | 11/29/04
It's the lawyers  seosamh_z | 11/24/04
Lawyers force Novell to sue???  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/24/04
Different  seosamh_z | 11/24/04
Good grief, how wrong can you be?  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/24/04
The purpose of a patent  B.O.F.H. | 11/24/04
AND . . .  openMind | 11/29/04
Yes, far too fast.  seosamh_z | 11/25/04
Not as wrong as you  AbsolutelyNot | 11/29/04
Patent suit?  IT_User | 11/24/04
You must be thinking of the WordPerfect suit. (nt)  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/25/04
Let me help you folks a bit.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 11/24/04
Not quite  IT_User | 11/24/04
Go Away?  openMind | 11/29/04
The fact this company went bankrupt speaks volumes  hipparchus2000 | 11/25/04
guess they feel they should of paid to use these patents  JasonL31 | 11/26/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here