amazing to see you being wrong ;-) Dig aside, there are many industries that function quite well without patent protection and IMHO, software is one of them. Google does not need patents to protect what it is doing, neither does facebook. How many patents protect TestNG and how many have copied your work? It is my believe that software is a utilitarian product and the mistake is that this exception to the rule that you cannot patent utilitarian products has been broken. So using your interface analagy, GIGO....
Regards, Kirk On Aug 8, 2011, at 5:58 AM, Cédric Beust ♔ wrote: > On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 5:59 PM, mP <[email protected]> wrote: > I wonder if religious people support patents more than non religious, > primarily because patents are a weapon of the elite to further their > own interests rather like the Bible and other so called holy books. > > Let's avoid this kind of sweeping statement. > > Basically, I think that software patents are an interface and the US software > patent system is a buggy implementation. One thing I have noticed about buggy > implementations is that they usually don't invalidate the soundness of the > interface they implement. > > -- > 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. -- 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.
