Hi, Software patents in Europe do not hold and have been discussed a lot in recent years in the context of the European Union. I have been a FFII (Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure) activist against the approval of software patents by the European Parliament. Several legislation bills have not been approved, thanks to the effort of polititians and activists who are against it.
Some bad examples of patent use in US have illustrated our arguments (eg legal battles - which are not so commonplace in Europe, Amazon 1-click settings, ...) The question of being able to use "the underlying concept" is quite sensitive and has been throughly discussed. Info from FFII site: - http://swpat.ffii.org/analysis/index.en.html Software Patents: Questions, Analyses, Proposals - http://swpat.ffii.org Main FFII site on software patents. - http://www.ffii.org FFII site. Thought it would interest you. Cheers, Eduardo --- Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu: > > I basically agree with James about the patent > process. > > Software or algorithmic patents are not really very > powerful, because there > are usually ways to work around them anyway, i.e. to > make modifications that > are just barely enough to get around the patent, but > still utilize the core > concept underlying the patent. For this reason > software or algorithmic > patents aren't likely to be enforceable in a useful > way. > > In a business context, they have a use, but only in > an annoying way: because > investors like patents, and as a preventative > against other companies making > patents that cover your ideas and forcing you to pay > large sums of money to > defeat their bogus patents in court. > > The patent system began as an attempt to protect the > "little guy" from > inventing something and then having a big company > steal it and sell it > without giving him any of the money. It still > serves this purpose in many > cases; but plenty of times it now serves as a way of > letting big companies > blockade large areas of IP with unenforceable > patents that "little guys" > can't afford to violate because they can't afford > the legal fees it would > take to get them overturned. > > In the case of my Novamente AI design, clearly there > are dozens of > patentable innovations in the design, but do I have > the $20K and month of > effort (estimated time, spread over a longer period > of course) that it would > require to patent each one? Clearly not. > > On the other hand, we *are* patenting some AI > algorithms we've devised in > the context of Biomind, our AI/bioinformatics > company, because patents are > considered particularly valuable in the biopharma > industry. Frankly, this > is not so much because we crave patent protection, > it's mainly because if > Biomind should ever be acquired or go public, these > patents will be viewed > (perhaps wrongly, in my personal view) as valuable > IP by potential > purchasers of our company or its stock. > > -- Ben Goertzel > > _______________________________________________________ Yahoo! Acesso Gr�tis - navegue de gra�a com conex�o de qualidade! http://br.acesso.yahoo.com/ ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
