4 ms·
They're far more often used as bludgeons to drain the defense coffers of small software studios and startups. By the time a patent is granted, that startup has
by Vivtek 17y ago
They're far more often used as bludgeons to drain the defense coffers of small software studios and startups. By the time a patent is granted, that startup has moved on to something better - show me a single software patent that a competent programmer couldn't develop in a few weeks given the description. Not the patented mechanism (that's generally obvious and we all know it), just what the invention is supposed to solve.
Software patents are an abuse of the patent system.
- wheels 17y ago> show me a single software patent that a competent programmer couldn't develop in a few weeks given the description. MP3.
- pyre 17y agoIIRC, MPEG Layer-III isn't a single patent. So it's a bit of a misnomer to say that 'MP3' is a patent that a competent programmer couldn't come up with on their own. On the other hand, I've heard some audio people say that MP3 wasn't necessarily anything 'new' to audio engineers/producers. It was just translating into software what people in the business already knew.
- wheels 17y agoIt certainly was new to audio engineers and producers. It wasn't wholly new to researchers in the field of psycho-acoustic compression, but then, there's rarely much that is new for the inner circle of researchers in a field.
- cookiecaper 17y agoI think that competent programmers with relevant training could develop good compression techniques for things like audio and video. In fact, that happens somewhat often.
- krakensden 17y agoRSA. But you're still correct.
- brlewis 17y agoHere's my hypothesis: The less obvious a software "invention" is, the more closely it resembles patenting pure mathematics. Unfortunately, a severe shortage of non-obvious software patents makes this hypothesis difficult to test.
- krakensden 17y agoof course, patenting mathematics isn't allowed :)
- gnaritas 17y agoNor should patents on programs be, since they're all just math anyway; mostly sloppy not well thought out math, but math none the less.
- SapphireSun 17y agoIsn't the point not that other people can implement it, but that they didn't come up with it? Not that there isn't serious abuse of the system, but it's supposed to protect innovation, and ease of implementation can be innovation.
- Vivtek 17y agoNo. This is a common misconception. The patent system is there to give a temporary monopoly on an implementation in return for allowing it to be public domain later - and disclosing the knowledge now, not later, so that additional innovation can proceed. The only problem is that the term of the monopoly is selected to support mechanical engineering growth rates of the 19th century, and we're stupidly trying to apply it to entire industries that rise and disappear more quickly than that. Read some patents from other fields - they typically protect and disclose stuff that really took some work to figure out. That's the point. One-click ordering, though? That's just plain bullshit. Anybody could implement that.