3 ms·
I find Dan Bricklin's apparent attitude toward software patents infuriating: http://danbricklin.com/patenting.htm http://danbricklin.com/patenting.htm http://
by domador 5y ago
I find Dan Bricklin's apparent attitude toward software patents infuriating:
http://danbricklin.com/patenting.htm http://danbricklin.com/patenting.htm
http://danbricklin.com/patentsandsoftware.htm http://danbricklin.com/patentsandsoftware.htm
On the one hand he acknowledges the benefits of programming in a software-patent-free environment:
"At that time in history, and before, few fundamental programming concepts were patented. We all borrowed from each other. Just a few examples of concepts where patents played no role in those days: word wrapping, cut and paste, the word processing ruler, sorting and compression algorithms, hypertext linking, and compiler techniques."
On the other hand, he seems to have developed an opportunistically pro-software-patent stance since then:
"That said, I also feel that no matter how much you might feel that patents don't work for the software industry, and how much you may take up the torch to change the law, it is the law today and a fact of programming life..."
"Nevertheless, patenting software is encouraged by law, and I find it my duty to the shareholders of the companies I've been working for to take advantage of this protection."
I could only wish that someone like him, with his presumable level of influence would promote the abolition of software patents. Instead, it sounds like he acknowledges that they're bad, but then makes no effort to use his influence against them, and becomes yet another stockpiler in the software-patent arms race. He himself walked through an open door of intellectual freedom, but seems to have made little effort in making sure that door stayed open for others behind him, or in reopening that now-closed door. He benefitted from the door being open and is now benefitting from it being closed, after he crossed it.
- ddingus 5y agoDisney syndrome. Disney benefited from The Brothers Grimm, yet when it is their turn to return works to the robust public commons, they work hard to deny others the same opportunity.
- tannhaeuser 5y agoOTOH, patents apparently did nothing to prevent Excel's rise to the top when there was Lotus 1-2-3 and in fact Visicalc before; MS Excel starting life on Mac OS, and MS only providing Multiplan on DOS (and CP/M?) which was seen as a budget alternative to 1-2-3.
- domador 5y agoI'm not sure what patents might have been in place at the time Excel came around. In any case, large wealthy companies such as Microsoft are better equipped to deal with the looming threat posed by software patents (or even actual patent-based lawsuits.) Software patents seem particular noxious to smaller software development companies that are more vulnerable to being shut down by a shakedown.
- EricE 5y agoPatents do serve a useful purpose - for example they were considered so important to fostering innovation that they are built into the US Constitution, which is pretty lightweight with what is in there, all other things considered. The problem is law hasn't kept up with how they are being abused, or as with Disney and Copyright - special interests have succeeded in perverting the original goals to tilt the balance of power into their favor. We need to wrestle control back, not toss the whole system. Speaking of the US Constitution again, very well reasoned arguments as to why patents were considered so valuable in Federalist 43: https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-10-02-0248 https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-10-02-024...
- ddingus 5y agoPersonally, I feel both "limited time" and "exclusive right" need very serious reconsideration in light of: how rapidly software can develop, and or can be lost , and unlike material innovations and constructs, software with many contributors ends up being greater than any one contribution, and this being true for all users, both potential and actual , and the need for systems, consisting of and or containing software, to interoperate, be serviced and preserved.