> A rightist view would be that patents allow first-to-the-finish-line inventors to reap financial awards that lead to success and freedom. A leftist view would

> A rightist view would be that patents allow first-to-the-finish-line inventors to reap financial awards that lead to success and freedom. A leftist view would be that the opportunity cost of patents is an increased cost Patents as originally formulated were to incentivize public disclosure of new techniques for building things. Portland cement is a great example: the company could have kept the formula secret and profited significantly, but instead a patent was filed, they got a short monopoly, and for over a century we have enjoyed the benefits of a publicly known formula. Pure ideas (like math and physics) were considered non-patentable. If we can reform patents to disallow patenting software (and all other pure "ideas" with no physical realization), I think that will continue to help encourage public disclosure of helpful techniques (like Portland cement) without all the stupid baggage of software patents.