Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.org.eff.talk:9484 misc.int-property:592 comp.unix.bsd:6526 Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property,alt.suit.att-bsdi,comp.unix.bsd Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!uunet!spsgate!mogate!newsgate!chdasic.sps.mot.com!dichter From: dichter@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Carl Dichter) Subject: Re: Patents: What they are. What they aren't. Other factors. Message-ID: <1992Oct13.200634.3486@newsgate.sps.mot.com> Sender: usenet@newsgate.sps.mot.com Nntp-Posting-Host: 223.197.55.10 Organization: SPS References: <1992Oct6.071314.16966@netcom.com> <11738.Oct1103.23.3892@virtualnews.nyu.edu> <1992Oct11.043358.5543@netcom.com> <id.6S0U.TRE@ferranti.com> Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 20:06:34 GMT Lines: 51 In article <id.6S0U.TRE@ferranti.com>, peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes: |> In article <1992Oct11.043358.5543@netcom.com> mcgregor@netcom.com (Scott Mcgregor) writes: |> > Moreover, even conceding individual harms |> > from individual patents against individual people, it is my opinion |> > that there is little evidence that overall we aren't benefitted by |> > patents, and the LPF advocates eliminating all software patents even |> > if only a few are demonstrably harmful and the mass might be |> > beneficial. |> |> The LPF advocates eliminating all software patents because they have found |> a number of demonstrably harmful ones and no evidence whatsoever that the |> mass might be beneficial. In fact, the best evidence is that there is no |> observable benefit to patents on purely software systems. |> |> > > You are unable to exhibit a single beneficial software patent. |> |> > I've attempted to give plausable examples. Tell me about the "demonstrably harmful ones". I've studied the LZW patent issues, and other examples given by LPF. The ATT vs BSDI & CSRG suit is not about patents: it's about copyright and trade secrets. To me, trade secret is the worst way to protect intellectual property: don't blame "clean-rooms" on patents. The Lotus vs Paperback Software, Microsoft, or Borland, disputes were over user-interface copyrights. The XOR patent is a hardware patent, I have found no examples of it having been used against software. If you have an example of software patent abuse, let's hear it. Until then, let's not take out all of our frustration in imperfect justice on patents-- or even on lawyers (although it's fun). Justice is imperfect because we are imperfect. Reasonable laws give us a non-violent recourse when we believe that someone has stolen our invention. My article in favor of software patents (UNIX Review, Nov '92 "Patently Wrong") is available now. Feel free to flame me after you've read it. ---------------------- Carl R. Dichter "iwannanugui" Motorola ASIC Division email: dichter@chdasic.sps.mot.com /* ** Quick to judge, quick to anger.... slow to understand. ** Ignorance and prejudice, and fear, walk hand in hand." ** --Neil Peart" */