Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: German Parliament Tells Government To Strictly Limit Patents On Software
3 views
Skip to first unread message
7
Jun 12, 2013, 2:34:32 PM6/12/13
to
Crabbit Bampot wrote:
> <http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/06/12/1552251/german-parliament-tells-
government-to-strictly-limit-patents-on-software>
>
> <quote>
> "On Friday the 7th of June the German Parliament decided upon a joint
> motion to limit software patents. The Parliament urges the German
> Government to take steps to limit the granting of patents on computer
> programs (PDF, German; English translation). Software should
> exclusively be covered by copyright, and the rights of the copyright
> holders should not be devalued by third parties' software patents. The
> only exception where patents should be allowed are computer programs
> which replace a mechanical or electromagnetic component. In addition
> the Parliament made clear that governmental actions related to patents
> must never interfere with the legality of distributing Free Software."
> </quote>
They are all wrong about this entire debate.
The original reasons for patent is that you share it with government
for license revenues and tax that can be made from it,
and technology is not lost.
If you don't share, no one benefits and technology is lost
and at a very alarming rate for modern industrialized societies.
But since the days of patents began, the industrial environment
has changed and now also includes computers which were not around in the
conventional sense, in those times.
Computers have physical technology and software technology to make
them work very well.
So if you come up with a new algorithm for sorting n numbers in n steps,
then unless there is a vehicle for sharing, the technology is lost.
Its lost in a horrible way as well, because millions have been spent
already on the R&D to find method to sort n numbers in n steps.
Even though the technology has no physical existence, its effects are
very real. From how stock market shares are picked in a timely way
to how data is mined in a timely way. Without that specific technology,
everybody is poorer for it.
Software patents have been harmed by irresponsible granting of evolutionary
and obvious patents on software such as one click crap, just because
someone sought to write something down and file it before anyone else.
The debate should be about how to separate the crap patent granting
procedures currently in place, particularly in USA (and the litigand
friendly procedures that severely burdens producers of hardware and
software) and have better patenting procedures that extends protection for
important software technology without which we would all be poor.
> <http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/06/12/1552251/german-parliament-tells-
government-to-strictly-limit-patents-on-software>
>
> <quote>
> "On Friday the 7th of June the German Parliament decided upon a joint
> motion to limit software patents. The Parliament urges the German
> Government to take steps to limit the granting of patents on computer
> programs (PDF, German; English translation). Software should
> exclusively be covered by copyright, and the rights of the copyright
> holders should not be devalued by third parties' software patents. The
> only exception where patents should be allowed are computer programs
> which replace a mechanical or electromagnetic component. In addition
> the Parliament made clear that governmental actions related to patents
> must never interfere with the legality of distributing Free Software."
> </quote>
They are all wrong about this entire debate.
The original reasons for patent is that you share it with government
for license revenues and tax that can be made from it,
and technology is not lost.
If you don't share, no one benefits and technology is lost
and at a very alarming rate for modern industrialized societies.
But since the days of patents began, the industrial environment
has changed and now also includes computers which were not around in the
conventional sense, in those times.
Computers have physical technology and software technology to make
them work very well.
So if you come up with a new algorithm for sorting n numbers in n steps,
then unless there is a vehicle for sharing, the technology is lost.
Its lost in a horrible way as well, because millions have been spent
already on the R&D to find method to sort n numbers in n steps.
Even though the technology has no physical existence, its effects are
very real. From how stock market shares are picked in a timely way
to how data is mined in a timely way. Without that specific technology,
everybody is poorer for it.
Software patents have been harmed by irresponsible granting of evolutionary
and obvious patents on software such as one click crap, just because
someone sought to write something down and file it before anyone else.
The debate should be about how to separate the crap patent granting
procedures currently in place, particularly in USA (and the litigand
friendly procedures that severely burdens producers of hardware and
software) and have better patenting procedures that extends protection for
important software technology without which we would all be poor.
0 new messages