Todd Walton wrote:
On Apr 11, 2005 2:41 PM, Michael O'Keefe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Maybe if software was unpatentable, your company wouldn't need to hold
all those patents.
That's true, but then how would they protect their work ?
That's the dilemma I'm faced with in taking this stance.
Protected from whom? Protected *by* whom?
From those who would benefit financially from all the hard work done (the
whole point of a patent system) without some sort of remuneration (license
fees)
Why do you think the patent system should exclude software?
Becoz software is just mathematics, and mathematics are explicitly excluded
from being patentable. That's why all these 'software' patents are
currently worded as "a process where by a user can buy something by
clicking a mouse once". They patent the process, not the actual software.
In most cases, it's just collecting a bunch of well known processes into a
single process, and calling it an innovation (one-click shopping is new,
how ? becoz they use cookies...INNOVATIVE ? maybe, patentable ? c'mon !)
--
Michael O'Keefe | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Live on and Ride a 03 BMW F650GSDakar| [EMAIL PROTECTED] / |
I like less more or less less than |Work:+1 858 845 3514 / |
more. UNIX-live it,love it,fork() it |Fax :+1 858 845 2652 /_p_|
My views are MINE ALONE, blah, blah, |Home:+1 760 788 1296 \`O'|
blah, yackety yack - don't come back |Fax :+1 858 _/_\|_,
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
