4 ms·

That's fine. Trade secrets are already how most things work in software and it's a much better model. I don't want their dumb ideas; I don't want their bad co

by bcoates 14y ago

That's fine. Trade secrets are already how most things work in software and it's a much better model. I don't want their dumb ideas; I don't want their bad code; and I don't care about not being able to repurpose subsidized hardware. All I care about is removing the veto power the patent system gives random strangers have over my ability to develop things they have nothing to do with.

randomdata 14y ago
Trade secrets are what patents were designed to protect against. So that current knowledge can be made available to future generations, at the cost of a short term of exclusivity to the one who holds the secret. I feel the problem is that you can recreate many of the patents being granted today just by taking a quick glance at the implementation. What do future generations have to gain by knowing that one click can finalize a purchase on a website? Knowing what precise measurements of compounds when combined together can cure a disease has a little more merit.
- bad_user 14y ago
  Isn't it funny how most software patents can't be protected by trade secrets? How many patents were infringed (1) by mistake, or (2) by somebody trying to emulate some behavior or (3) by somebody reading a patent description? Personaly I've never seen (3) happening. It may sometimes happen when it comes to video codecs or AI, but funny how those domains are strongly linked to math ;)
Tloewald 14y ago
This is a random veto power with a fixed lifespan in exchange ofr which the design is published. Trade secrets were an ongoing disaster. We're still trying to figure out how Stradivarius made violins, for example. Yes, stupid things get patented. Yes, the system is corrupt. But don't assume some other "simple" system or non system will have no downside.
- andrewaylett 14y ago
  The trouble is, it's not the same: Software Patents protect the design of the idea not the implementation. Even after the patent has expired, you still don't get to see how the product actually works. Also, the implementation is protected by copyright -- it seems unfair to give software double-protection.
- bcoates 14y ago
  Having tried to read patents to gain insight into how something worked, I'm confident that if Stradivarius had written valid patents for his methods we still wouldn't be able to reproduce it.
- dlitz 14y ago
  > We're still trying to figure out how Stradivarius made violins, for example. We're actually not trying to figure out how to make violins that sound just as good: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stradivarius&oldid=522654141#Comparisons_in_sound_quality http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stradivarius&o... Also, Stallman is specifically talking about software, not manufacturing specialized devices.
  - Tloewald 14y ago
    A typical specialized device today is largely driven by software. To contribute to this debate you need to understand this. For example: most musical instruments today are electronic. If I build a guitar amplifier out of vacuum tubes, Stallman will let me patent it, but if I build a high tech amplifier with digital preprocessing to simulate the behavior of any one of a large number of old vacuum tube amplifiers etc. then no patents for me.

by bcoates 14y ago

randomdata 14y ago

Trade secrets are what patents were designed to protect against. So that current knowledge can be made available to future generations, at the cost of a short term of exclusivity to the one who holds the secret. I feel the problem is that you can recreate many of the patents being granted today just by taking a quick glance at the implementation. What do future generations have to gain by knowing that one click can finalize a purchase on a website? Knowing what precise measurements of compounds when combined together can cure a disease has a little more merit.

bad_user 14y ago
Isn't it funny how most software patents can't be protected by trade secrets? How many patents were infringed (1) by mistake, or (2) by somebody trying to emulate some behavior or (3) by somebody reading a patent description? Personaly I've never seen (3) happening. It may sometimes happen when it comes to video codecs or AI, but funny how those domains are strongly linked to math ;)

Tloewald 14y ago

This is a random veto power with a fixed lifespan in exchange ofr which the design is published. Trade secrets were an ongoing disaster. We're still trying to figure out how Stradivarius made violins, for example. Yes, stupid things get patented. Yes, the system is corrupt. But don't assume some other "simple" system or non system will have no downside.

andrewaylett 14y ago
The trouble is, it's not the same: Software Patents protect the design of the idea not the implementation. Even after the patent has expired, you still don't get to see how the product actually works. Also, the implementation is protected by copyright -- it seems unfair to give software double-protection.
bcoates 14y ago
Having tried to read patents to gain insight into how something worked, I'm confident that if Stradivarius had written valid patents for his methods we still wouldn't be able to reproduce it.
dlitz 14y ago
> We're still trying to figure out how Stradivarius made violins, for example. We're actually not trying to figure out how to make violins that sound just as good: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stradivarius&oldid=522654141#Comparisons_in_sound_quality http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stradivarius&o... Also, Stallman is specifically talking about software, not manufacturing specialized devices.
- Tloewald 14y ago
  A typical specialized device today is largely driven by software. To contribute to this debate you need to understand this. For example: most musical instruments today are electronic. If I build a guitar amplifier out of vacuum tubes, Stallman will let me patent it, but if I build a high tech amplifier with digital preprocessing to simulate the behavior of any one of a large number of old vacuum tube amplifiers etc. then no patents for me.