4 ms·
This is a rubbish article. It attempts to paper over obvious, horrible problems by blaming the people who try to game the system. It also attempts to marginali
by bediger 15y ago
This is a rubbish article. It attempts to paper over obvious, horrible problems by blaming the people who try to game the system. It also attempts to marginalize objections to the current patent system by blaming people.
For starters, the anti-patent (or even anti-"Intellectual Property") position is not a default mindset, even today. The anti-patent viewpoint is not an "intellectual cheat", if the arguers back up the position with research, facts and examples, which, oddly, this article even gives.
Secondarily, the article even raises the basis for patents in the USA: to promote progress in science and engineering. If the patent system doesn't do that, then what is it's purpose? If the patent system just ends up giving incumbents in the market ways to limit competition,the it is indeed well and truly broken.
- johnpapps 15y agoVery well said, this article is misleading to say the least. I take issue with article suggesting that all anti-patent views want that patent system abolished. That is absolutely not the case. The patent system should be brought into line with the rate at which industry is capable of innovating today. Furthermore, software patents need special treatment in their own right. They are simply not specific enough, and it is the generalisation that stifles innovation. Again, I refer to Martin Fowler's excellent blog post on the subject of software patents http://martinfowler.com/bliki/SoftwarePatent.html http://martinfowler.com/bliki/SoftwarePatent.html