Slashdot Mirror
Nobelist Gary Becker Calls For an End To Software Patents
GigaOM notes that (excerpting) "Gary Becker, a Nobel-prize winning professor at the University of Chicago, stated this week that the U.S. patent system is ”too broad, too loose, and too expensive” and called for the end of software patents: 'Disputes over software patents are among the most common, expensive, and counterproductive. Their exclusion from the patent system would discourage some software innovations, but the saving from litigation costs over disputed patent rights would more than compensate the economy for that cost.'" Here are Becker's comments, from the always-fun Becker-Posner Blog.
Is it a mere algorithm? An algorithm with a specific realised implementation?
Since I'm not currently in a country where mathematics can be owned, it seems weird to me.
Does any software company actually indicate that they would stop work if it were not for software patents? I.e. is there any company which says that it relies on software patents to do business in software, rather than as a defensive/offensive mechanism?
I believe the generally accepted term is "Nobel Laureate". Who wrote "Nobelist"?
Is 1563649 a prime number?
Yeah, just abolish all patents, in every field, not just software. Then see how the ensuing chaos, where copycats benefit more than inventors, destroy the market.
This is analogous to banning cars. Tens of thousands of people die in automobile accidents every year, so it would be reasonable to ban cars.
Trade secrets are much easier to keep in other industries, where the method of manufacture is just as important as the final product. Corporations can (and do) require all employees with access to trade secrets to sign a non-disclosure agreement, and they insure against leaks. Or they purchase stock in other fields which will benefit from these innovations prior to release. I work in an industry where we rely much more on trade secrets than patents, and it's hardly chaos - we don't have to waste time on the legal nonsense which bores engineers.
"De-regulate something and CHAAAAOOSS will erupt!" is the argument an alarmist who lacks creativity, someone who thinks businesses are incapable of adapting. We don't need your "help".
You're the one who is banning cars - there's a wealth of car-related inventions which are being squatted upon, delayed because they don't yet fit the business model of their owners. And note how I don't need to rely on strawman hypotheticals.
It boggles my mind that the Government expects that physical device designers will do patent searches as they design their devices, rather than simply implementing what is obvious at the time to implement. Physical device patents are written in such a way as to make them difficult to interpret and appear broad even when they aren't. It simply isn't practical for physical device designers were to do their "due diligence" as they create their plans, and if they did no appreciable amount of designs would be created.
There's nothing special about software. The patent system is broken *in general* not for the specific case of the industry you know something about.