On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 1:35 PM, phil swenson <[email protected]>wrote:
> Reducing the term I think is doable. Getting rid of transferability > sounds complicated. You take on a new investor, is that a transfer of > ownership? To whom? The patent is filed in the company's name, additional investors change nothing to that fact. > What about voting rights vs outright ownership? Plus you > are already removing much of the perceived "value" with reducing the > term + ditching transferability So now you're seeing value in software patents besides protection? I thought this whole discussion started because nobody saw *any* value in software patents, not even protection? > - so why go the extra bit and just abolish software/process patents? > > I still haven't heard much about the benefits of software patents. > Could someone enlighten me? > We've covered this extensively, haven't we? You get a short term monopoly on derived technology so you can recoup your costs. -- 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.
