> http://blog.patentology.com.au/2012/05/bickering-about-software-patents-misses.html
Yeah. Even though Patentology seems to come out in favor of
(software) patents, he seems at least to give a sane account of
the contending sides -- considering that being a patent attorney
it's clear on which side his bread is buttered.
Can't do this justice now -- but just some thoughts:
1. Patentology's pro-patent arguments (and assumptions) need to
be probed. If they're the sort of argument a patent attorney
makes, then being able to refute or at least weaken those
arguments would be useful.
2. Even though Patentology is correct in pointing that the GPL
(and copyleft) technically relies on copyright law, he omits
to mention that that's only a defence against a system that's
largely biassed against free flow of ideas and methods and
code.
3. He does gloss over a lot of the difficulties with software
patents.
4. I also noticed a link to his commentary from early this on
the apparent go-head for Amazon's `one-click' patent in Canada:
http://blog.patentology.com.au/2012/01/canadian-patent-office-concedes-allows.html
I must say, it didn't make sense to me.
All for now...
-- Smiles, Les.
_______________________________________________
Free-software-melb mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb
