Perhaps I didn't make clear why I thought your argument was bogus: There's no proof at all that the US is more willing to splurge on research than companies outside of it. If anything, there's proof the other way around. Yes, apple is better at it than nokia, but nokia spends more money, which is the point.
Trying to point out that the US is more innovative than europe does not work; that's merely pointing out a correlation which proves nothing at all. That's like arguing that building hospitals causes illness based on the observation that there's a lot more health issues amongst all the people that reside within a mile of one. I do, however, agree that its hard to tell. But how does that help the case for software patents? Software patents have clearly been proven to be stifling, AND on a general thought experiment level, they are eerily close to thought crime. The burden of proof is on the software patent advocates, it is not on me to prove they suck. Nokia's market share in the US is tiny compared to the rest of the world. You're not going to dodge the "Nokia has a massive research budget" bullet. If someone wants to eat nokia's cake by copying their innovations, US patent law isn't going to be of any help to them, because nokia earns the big bucks outside of the US. There's little innovation from china, but this is true as well for markets that do not have patents in the first place, which clearly shows that your insinuation that there's a causal relation between having patent law and being innovative is a bunch of horse manure. I have absolutely no idea what "99% of startups fail" (which also explains why 99% of 'those' startups fail, regardless of what you mean by 'those') has to do with patent law. On Sep 5, 5:29 pm, Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 5, 2010 at 1:35 AM, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]>wrote: > > > Europe has no software patents. Clearly the > > lack of software patents does not stifle research budgets. > > Please reread my post. The question is whether the absence of software > patents would allow for more or less innovations. In other words, is there > more innovation in countries that don't have software patents than in > countries that do. > > No matter how fast you want to answer this question, I'm saying it's really > very hard to tell (and naïve observers would probably say that there is a > lot more software innovation coming out of the US than in any other > country). > > > I grant you apple is doing a far better job at it, but I don't see what > > patent law > > has to do with this. > > You are confusing innovating and protecting your innovations. We're talking > about the latter. > > > You argue: If software patents didn't exist, companies may not bother > > with research. Well, nokia has the biggest budget and they live on an > > entire continent without software patents. > > They are bound by US software patent laws for anything they want to sell on > the US continent, so I'm pretty sure that US software patent laws have a > huge impact on their product decisions. > > There still is innovation, but there is no proof that the innovation > > > that is happening is being boosted by the US patent system. > > I agree, but this goes both ways. There is no obvious proof that the absence > of software patent laws would boost innovation either. > > > For example, a large amount of startups don't patent anything, yet they > > appear to be one of the main drivers of innovation. > > 99% of these start ups fail. Those that do well have either good technology, > good people or a good patent portfolio (which is very often the main driver > in an acquisition decision). > > Again, please don't twist my words, I'm simply drawing your attention to the > fact that abolishing software patent laws overnight would have a lot of > negative effects that you don't seem to want to consider. > > > I can point out a number of cases where patent law is actively stifling > > innovation > > Me as well, and if you know what I was doing at my previous job, you > probably know exactly what I'm referring to. And yet, I see this debate in a > much more nuanced way than you are. Maybe this should cause you to pause. > > Also, patent law basically doesn't cover china. Which so happens to be cheap > > > knockoff central, so your main point there just doesn't add up at all. > > Well, let me ask you a simple question, then: do you think we see more > software innovations coming from China or coming from the US? > > -- > Cédric -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
