EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

11.28.12

A Stacked Software Patents Panel/Debate

Posted in Patents, Videos at 8:45 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

An ‘IP’ business versus an engineering professor (yet again)

Direct link: Software Patent Debate

Notice how the panel is stacked. The latter guy speaks about “bad” patents and does not oppose software patents as a whole. So neither side (of the two) is against software patents, certainly not the moderator (who is in the ‘law’ sector). Where are the programmers?

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

15 Comments

  1. Michael said,

    November 28, 2012 at 9:52 am

    Gravatar

    Would you want extremists on such a panel?

    Jose_X Reply:

    We want sane people. Obviously most software by far has been created without looking at patents and without enforcing patents or taking out patents. Patent law is broken horribly and made obvious in fields like software. The Supreme Court has rejected pure software patents (ie, software on machine that doesn’t create new matter or transform) 9-0 in I think all occasions in the last few years where the topic has gone to them.

    It’s so sad that someone would write software and think a software patent even comes close to the detail and work required to build real software that works in real life and does interesting things usable by others.

    Michael Reply:

    Oh, do not get me wrong, I would not want “insane” people either. But the idea of just getting rid of all current protection (as broken as the system is – and I think we all agree it is) without having a replacement is, well, insane.

    What type of protection would you suggest be available to those who create new products?

    Jose_X Reply:

    Limited to patents on software, we have had many years where most development if not all was done without patents. What is insane about that?

    You seem to be ignoring copyrights, which already are overbearing themselves but at least respect independent creation and are of much more limited scope. Never mind that a great many software developers even yield all or most copyright AND trade secret protections, without seeking patent protection.

    The motivations to write software are vast. The cost of being hindered by patents (which are broad by design) is very large. And the highest court in the US is rather skeptical that anything but at most a very small number of “software patents” should have protection. So for all the many people getting monopolies without merit we are exacting a high cost on potentially millions of software developers.

    It is insane to handcuff so many talented developers, especially since these are the people actually writing the intricate software rather than the broad software patents that it takes merely a person of ordinary skill who found something merely non-obvious.

    The people complaining about software needing patent incentives, for the most part, I suspect, hardly write software, at least not quality software. Look around. You even have lawyers and execs who couldn’t code their way out of a closet and have no more clever ideas than a person of ordinary skill in the art coming up with broad software patents. That is insane. These people are handcuffing the real developers, .. and who come up with so much patentable material yearly (it’s a low bar to meet), they would have no time to write up all the patents (or money to pay for them) much less code and solve the actual customer problems.

    Michael Reply:

    I merely said there should be protections. I did not say what kind. Does not matter to me – as long as developers can have their IP protected in a reasonable way.

  2. NotZed said,

    November 28, 2012 at 5:44 pm

    Gravatar

    Lawyers don’t care what programmers think? They probably don’t even realise why they would even be interested …

    Michael Reply:

    Lawyers understand the value of the laws programers might not.

    Jose_X Reply:

    The laws, the more of them and the more convoluted and costly they are to litigate, the more they help lawyers make more money.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    And the lawyers’ clients, usually large corporations (see how Lessig explains it in his recent talks) keep competition off their yard (niche monopolies).

    Michael Reply:

    No doubt the system as it is leaves a *lot* to be desired. A whole lot.

    But there has to be some way to protect innovations… otherwise the incentive to create such innovations is reduced. But their should be time limits and a more stringent process to determine what should be protected (while making the process cheap… good luck with that!)

    Jose_X Reply:

    There are plenty of incentives to innovate software. There always have been. So much so that many write software and share all the hard work with others.

    And we don’t give patents to write novels, do we? Please don’t tell me there aren’t many “innovative” novels as we find “innovative” software.

    We also don’t give patents to write crucial mathematics.

    We grant patents (or should, if we were applying SCOTUS instructions and cared about promoting the progress) at most where something big and expensive is needed to bring a product to market.

    The problem with broad monopolies on cheap inventions (like writing) is that although they may incentivize a few a little more, they disincentivize a great many a great lot because a great many are otherwise able and already incentivized to participate yet there is a high likelihood you will be violating someone else’s broad monopoly accidentally and have many years of hard work be thrown down some proverbial drain, including many cases where the work and accomplishments you achieved were far greater than those of the patent writer.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Software developers, one might argue, need copyrights to incentivise development, not patents.

  3. Jose_X said,

    December 1, 2012 at 11:17 pm

    Gravatar

    Patents are the antithesis of the “standing on the shoulders of giants”. Maybe one can argue that when we have to invest loads of capital to build the invention that a patent is necessary, but on pure writing and thought??? That takes a real time cooperative effort and turns it into something much less efficient and restrictive and completely perverts the reward process.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Patents are a monopoly (or set of monopolies) on ideas that act as fences. We know that fences make as much sense as national borders — leading mostly to wars. An harmonious industry spends less effort on war and more effort on communal, collective benefit. Innovation comes through reuse.

    Michael Reply:

    Fences lead to wars? Borders lead to wars? Do you want to get rid of those, too?

    As far as innovation coming from reuse, what is the incentive to spend millions of dollars making a widget if you cannot get your money back for doing so?

What Else is New


  1. Links 12/12/2017: New BlackArch ISO and Stable Kernels

    Links for the day



  2. German Media Helps Cover Up -- Not Cover -- the Latest EPO Scandal

    EPO-Handelsblatt attention diversion tricks may be effective as German media barely shows interest in one of the EPO's biggest scandals to date



  3. PTAB Haters Fail to Guard Bogus Patents, But They Still Try

    Three Affiliated Tribes probably won't enjoy sovereign immunity from PTAB, Dennis Crouch won't manage to slow down PTAB, and patent litigation will stagnate as bad patents perish before they even land in a lawsuit



  4. Team UPC's Tilmann Defends Rogue Vote at 1 AM in the Morning With Just 5% of Politicians (Those With Vested Interests) Attending

    Just when German democracy is being stolen by a legislative coup (in the dead of night when 95% of politicians are absent/asleep) there's someone 'courageous' enough to rear his ugly head and attempt to justify that coup



  5. The Mask Falls: Lobbyist David Kappos Now Composes Pieces for the Patent Trolls' Lobby (IAM)

    David Kappos, a former USPTO Director who is now lobbying for large corporations that derive revenue from patent extortion, is writing for IAM even if his views are significantly biased by his aggressive paymasters (just like IAM's)



  6. The EPO Protest Tomorrow Isn't Just About Judge Corcoran But About the EPO as a Whole

    PO staff is about to protest against the employer, pointing out that "Battistelli is still showing a total and utter lack of respect not only for his staff and their rights but also for the Administrative Council and for the Tribunal"



  7. Claim: Judge Corcoran to Be Put Under Benoît Battistelli's Control in DG1

    Benoît Battistelli, who openly disregards and refuses to obey judges (while intervening in trials and delivering 'royal decrees' whenever it suits him), may soon gain direct control over the judge he hates most



  8. The European Patent Organisation Refrains (For Nearly a Week) From Speaking About Battistelli's Abuses as Judged by ILO Tribunal

    The EPO's silence on the matter of Patrick Corcoran is deafening; to make matters worse, the EPO continues to pollute media and academia with money of stakeholders, with the sole intention of lobbying and misleading news coverage (clearly a disservice to these stakeholders)



  9. Carl Josefsson Lets Judge Patrick Corcoran Come Back to Work at the EPO

    After initial reluctance to obey/respect the rulings from the ILO (security staff declining access) there is official permission for Patrick Corcoran to enter and resume work (following 3 years of injustice against him)



  10. Bristows is Being Hammered With Negative Comments For Its Unitary Patent (UPC) Lies

    The Unified Patent Court (UPC) is practically dead in the UK and Ireland; Bristows, nevertheless, continues with its desperate spin



  11. Links 11/12/2017: Linux 4.15 RC3, Debian 8.10 and Debian 9.3

    Links for the day



  12. Judge Corcoran Turns to His Government for Help and EPO 'House Ban' is Finally Lifted

    Sources that are very reliable say that Patrick Corcoran is coming back to work, however it's now clear when and how long for



  13. Raw: Battistelli's Control/Domination Over the Boards of Appeal

    An old EPO document internally voicing concerns about the lack of independence at the Boards of Appeal



  14. Raw: Conflicts of Interest of EPO Vice-President

    An old EPO concern regarding structural collisions and mixed loyalties



  15. Microsoft-Connected Patent Trolls Are Increasingly Active and Microsoft is Selling 'Protection' (Azure Subscriptions)

    There are several indications that Microsoft-connected shells, which produce no products and are threatening a large number of companies, are inadvertently if not intentionally helping Microsoft sell "indemnification" ("Azure IP Advantage," which echoes the Microsoft/Novell strategy for collecting what they called "patent royalties" one decade ago)



  16. Yes, RPost is Definitely a Patent Troll and Its Software Patents Are at Risk Thanks to Alice

    The latest whitewashing (or reputation-laundering) pieces from Watchtroll, which tries to justify patent-trolling activities with software patents, typically in the Eastern District of Texas



  17. The Latest Scams in the Patent World

    Examples of 'dirty laundry' of the patent microcosm, which it understandably does not like covering (as it harms confidence in their services/advice)



  18. Patents Are Becoming a Welfare System for the Rich and Powerful

    A culture of litigation and more recently the patenting of broad industry standards may mean that multi-billion dollar corporations are cashing in without lifting a finger



  19. Unlike the Mobile Domain, When it Comes to Cars Patent Lawsuits Remain Rare

    An optimistic note regarding the relatively low-temperature legal landscape surrounding advanced automobiles, even though patents are being amassed on software in that domain



  20. The Federal Circuit Rules (Again) in Favour of Section 101/Alice, Koch-Funded CPIP Tries to Overturn Alice at the Supreme Court

    The US Supreme Court's decision on Alice continues to have a profoundly positive impact (except for trolls) and Koch-funded academics try hard to compel the US Supreme Court to reverse/override Alice (so far to no avail)



  21. Next Director of the USPTO Parrots Talking Points of Patent Extremists and Their Lobbyists

    The next USPTO boss (still subject to official confirmation) may be little more than a power grab by the litigation and patenting 'industry', which prioritises not science and technology but its own bottom line



  22. Raw: Three Years for 'Justice' (to be Disregarded by Benoît Battistelli) at ILO and Over a Decade at the EPO

    The delays associated with ‘justice’ at the EPO (usually neither justice nor compliance with rulings) have become so extraordinary that immunity should long ago have been stripped off and Battistelli et al been held accountable



  23. Raw: Scuttling of the General Advisory Committee and Battistelli Stacking the Deck to Have 'Yes Men' as Representatives

    How the EPO broke down resistance to Battistelli’s oppressive policies not only at the Council, disciplinary committees and auditory divisions but also staff representation (symptomatic of Battistelli’s notion of justice)



  24. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board Will Endure Supreme Court Test and Overcome the Tribal Immunity “Scam”

    The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), based on the latest news, is still winning the argument and justifying its existence/importance



  25. Phones/Mobility (Trillion-Dollar Market) May Have Become Infested and Encumbered by Aggressive, Dying Companies

    The tough reality that new entrants/entrepreneurs are facing now that a few dying giants look to "monetise" their patents rather than create anything



  26. Links 9/12/2017: Mesa 17.3, Wine 3.0 RC1, New Debian Builds

    Links for the day



  27. Like the EPO, Taiwan/China (SIPO) Harm SMEs With a Policy of Patent Maximalism Which Fosters Litigation, Not Innovation

    A culture of patent maximalism breeds plenty of lawsuits in China (good for the legal ‘industry’), but small companies that are innovative lose focus and resources, just like in Europe where SMEs are discriminated against



  28. Bristows Continues to Lie About Unitary Patent (UPC) in Britain Only to Get Rebutted in Comments, As Usual (Criticism Not Deleted Yet)

    The latest wave of posts (typically from Bristows) which herald an arrival of UPC in Britain are not just delusional but also constitute terrible legal advice



  29. The European Union Now Repeats Paid Propaganda From the EPO (Regarding the Unitary Patent)

    The EPO's push for UPC, which has already involved payments to media and academia, is spreading to the EU, which unfortunately fails to uphold the Rule of Law and the spirit of the EPC



  30. European Media Covers the Latest EPO Scandal and the EPO's Refusal to Obey Orders of a Court

    European media is starting to catch up with the latest from ILO and the great importance not only of the rulings but also the EPO's response to these


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts