3 ms·

Does anybody believe that software patents are not broken? It really seems obvious that they are, but have been looking for a counter-argument. There must be s

by jexe 16y ago

Does anybody believe that software patents are not broken? It really seems obvious that they are, but have been looking for a counter-argument. There must be somebody out there with a good defense.

michael_dorfman 16y ago
I don't think you're going to find anyone out there willing to defend the status quo as the best of all possible worlds. The real question is: how broken are they, and what level (and form) of reform/repeal is necessary?
- moultano 16y ago
  I'd actually like someone to give just one example of a software patent that improved the world through its existence. Maybe some company that couldn't have existed otherwise, or something like that. I'd like to at least get some visibility into the upside of patents if there is one, because I definitely don't have any now.
  - michael_dorfman 16y ago
    The upside of patents in general, or software patents in particular? The standard case for patents is to compare them to business secrets. In a world without patents, innovators may choose to keep their methods secret, and not share them with the world, in order to protect them. A patent gives the inventor a legally enforceable monopoly for a limited period of time, in exchange for publication of the details of the method such that others can reproduce it when the term expires. The key practical difference in terms of software patents is that reverse engineering makes it relatively impossible to actually keep an innovation secret-- but, as I said, that's a practical issue, and doesn't effect the philosophical justification of the patent system. In other words, young grad students Sergey and Larry are able to slave away on their super-secret algorithm, secure in the knowledge that no better-funded evil empire can steal it and implement it and compete with them.
    - moultano 16y ago
      I know how it is supposed to work in theory, but I want to see a case study where it actually worked in practice.

by jexe 16y ago

Does anybody believe that software patents are not broken? It really seems obvious that they are, but have been looking for a counter-argument. There must be somebody out there with a good defense.

michael_dorfman 16y ago

I don't think you're going to find anyone out there willing to defend the status quo as the best of all possible worlds. The real question is: how broken are they, and what level (and form) of reform/repeal is necessary?

moultano 16y ago
I'd actually like someone to give just one example of a software patent that improved the world through its existence. Maybe some company that couldn't have existed otherwise, or something like that. I'd like to at least get some visibility into the upside of patents if there is one, because I definitely don't have any now.
- michael_dorfman 16y ago
  The upside of patents in general, or software patents in particular? The standard case for patents is to compare them to business secrets. In a world without patents, innovators may choose to keep their methods secret, and not share them with the world, in order to protect them. A patent gives the inventor a legally enforceable monopoly for a limited period of time, in exchange for publication of the details of the method such that others can reproduce it when the term expires. The key practical difference in terms of software patents is that reverse engineering makes it relatively impossible to actually keep an innovation secret-- but, as I said, that's a practical issue, and doesn't effect the philosophical justification of the patent system. In other words, young grad students Sergey and Larry are able to slave away on their super-secret algorithm, secure in the knowledge that no better-funded evil empire can steal it and implement it and compete with them.
  - moultano 16y ago
    I know how it is supposed to work in theory, but I want to see a case study where it actually worked in practice.