Interestingly, Marc Cuban posted another piece on the subject<http://blogmaverick.com/2011/08/07/my-suggestion-on-patent-law/>. In particular, he used an example that I mentioned myself, although not to the same effect:
<< Pick any country that is currently doing well, China is a perfect example. In China the Intellectual Property Laws are so weak that someone thought it was a good idea to completely replicate Apple retail stores. Compare their economy to ours. As much as I hate to compare other economies to ours, it’s worth taking a look . >> Note that all he says about China is that "It's doing well". He's not making any connection with the lack of software patents, and more importantly, he carefully avoids assessing how innovative China is in terms of software. Probably because it's close to nonexistent. This is the kind of rhetoric that annoys me: empty and pushing embarrassing facts under the rug. -- Cédric On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Kevin Wright <[email protected]>wrote: > > > 2011/8/8 Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]> > >> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 5:00 AM, Kevin Wright <[email protected]>wrote: >> >> It seems to me that a crushing majority of the commercially successful >> software innovations that have been happening for the past decades have >> originated in the US. Note that I inserted "commercially successful" here, >> since it's the only one that really matters in this debate. Obscure >> inventions that never generate any money are not impacted by software >> patents since nobody bothers fighting over them. >> >> Also, I think you will be hard pressed to find examples of countries that >> are 1) active in the CS field and 2) don't have some sort of software patent >> laws (the US and Europe are out, obviously, which doesn't leave much). >> > > > Linux was indeed invented outside of the US and what was one of the first >> things that its creator did when Linux started taking off? Move to the US. >> > > > All I'm saying is that the system can't be as broken as abolitionists are >> claiming, the solution to this problem cannot be "Let's abolish all software >> patents". >> > > The US, arguably, has many advantages in Software. Tax regulation, > availability of venture capital, pools of talent, etc. Any or all of these > could be what attracted Linus or what drives a successful software industry. > > >> >> >>> The burden must surely be on showing that patents increase innovation, >>> and that they don't simply slow it down, or have no effect (other than to >>> line the pockets of lawyers and trolls). Without evidence-based proof in >>> either direction, it seems illogical and irresponsible to argue for the >>> continued existence of a system that burdens taxpayers with the cost of >>> administering the patent office. >>> >> >> This is where we differ. Innovation is happening, so the system is >> working, although maybe not optimally, therefore the burden of proof is on >> people who want to change it. They need to prove things will improve if we >> listen to them, and so far, they haven't produced much besides endless >> circle jerk discussions on Hacker News and Slashdot. >> >> > If I lace a place of agar jelly with penicillin, and point to the fact that > it has a bigger bacterial colony than the the empty petri-dish beside it, > then I'd be laughed out of this mailing list for suggesting that the > penicillin is what made the bacteria so successful... > > I contend that the patent system has a cost, in terms of administration at > the patent office, and funds that are bled from tech companies in the form > of legal fees. In the absence of any further data on whether or not patents > spur innovation, then this added cost alone should be enough to justify the > abolition of a system that's unable to provide evidence in support of its > stated benefits. > > -- > 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.
