The question is, how do you draw the line between the two? This is what has traditionally been protected by trade secrets - the problem is that software is eas

The question is, how do you draw the line between the two? This is what has traditionally been protected by trade secrets - the problem is that software is easier to reverse-engineer than real-life problems. The integrated circuit community has dealt with the issue ever since they were invented. My feeling is that the possibility of reverse-engineering has in fact spurred innovation in that field, and it's another reason why the no-poaching agreement between Apple and Google is so abhorrent, it did not only depress wages, it also slowed progress in the field. On the other hand, there is the issue of "gene patents". A pharmco takes out a patent on a gene, because you cannot patent abstract ideas, but what they are really doing is protecting the relationship between a gene and a medical condition. This is early discovery, and the price tag and timeline is that of a small space mission, several hundred millions and the better part of a decade. Once something is admitted to market the project is comparable to a flagship space mission, several billions and two decades of work. Patents are the wrong tool for that kind of job.