Comments on: No Software Patents? http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/no_software_patents/ Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:02:30 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Rick DeMent http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/no_software_patents/comment-page-1/#comment-367217 Rick DeMent Sat, 17 May 2008 17:15:53 +0000 http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2008/05/no_software_patents/#comment-367217 Current copyright law is absurd in the extreme. All it does is guarantee that nothing will ever go into the public domain. It does not support the useful arts and sciences. Software copyright is even more absurd in practice. Alex is right on this. Software is the only useful thing that gets copyright protection. Intellectual monopoly laws are a mess and have been hijacked to line the pockets of people who neither create nor develop the content an many cases. Time they were scrapped in favor of laws that don't seek to maintain rent seeking. Current copyright law is absurd in the extreme. All it does is guarantee that nothing will ever go into the public domain. It does not support the useful arts and sciences.

Software copyright is even more absurd in practice. Alex is right on this. Software is the only useful thing that gets copyright protection. Intellectual monopoly laws are a mess and have been hijacked to line the pockets of people who neither create nor develop the content an many cases. Time they were scrapped in favor of laws that don't seek to maintain rent seeking.

]]> By: mq http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/no_software_patents/comment-page-1/#comment-367026 mq Sat, 17 May 2008 14:06:06 +0000 http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2008/05/no_software_patents/#comment-367026 I agree with Alex, putting a copyright instead of a patent on software opens up a whole can of worms. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you copyrighted your software code you could go after anyone who used that code (or a snippet of that code) in another program that is completely unrelated to the original program. Code is bound to be duplicated in different programs, there are only so many ways to code routine tasks. A patent would protect the general idea behind your software without putting restriction on what code other programmers could use. It seems to me that copyrights should be left for completely unique pieces of work (like a book, movie script, website, etc.) and patents should be used for protecting your "big idea" from being hijacked by someone else. I agree with Alex, putting a copyright instead of a patent on software opens up a whole can of worms. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you copyrighted your software code you could go after anyone who used that code (or a snippet of that code) in another program that is completely unrelated to the original program. Code is bound to be duplicated in different programs, there are only so many ways to code routine tasks. A patent would protect the general idea behind your software without putting restriction on what code other programmers could use.

It seems to me that copyrights should be left for completely unique pieces of work (like a book, movie script, website, etc.) and patents should be used for protecting your "big idea" from being hijacked by someone else.

]]> By: orbit http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/no_software_patents/comment-page-1/#comment-366924 orbit Sat, 17 May 2008 12:14:06 +0000 http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2008/05/no_software_patents/#comment-366924 Why do you want to prevent independent creations of others? I think copyright for software is fine, because, as a software programmer, I don't have to care about what others are doing, I just write my code and sell it, distribute it. In the case of software patents, I have to read not code but claims produced by others, understand them, and finally draw a line between what I can and cannot do. I have read all the claims at the patent office, and stopped programming since then, and decided to fight software patents instead. Why do you want to prevent independent creations of others?

I think copyright for software is fine, because, as a software programmer, I don't have to care about what others are doing, I just write my code and sell it, distribute it.

In the case of software patents, I have to read not code but claims produced by others, understand them, and finally draw a line between what I can and cannot do.

I have read all the claims at the patent office, and stopped programming since then, and decided to fight software patents instead.

]]>