[Upd-discuss] A Lucid Reading of Software Patentability (Should be Required Reading)

[sandor]

Hello,

    I completely agree with you. But I think the logic is not carried 
though; the attempt to separate software is made only because it is 
easier to conceptualize as such..

    Ubiquity of creation is not special.
    Scientists on the same question often arrive at the same conclusions 
- separately.
    Artists develop from existing inputs and similarities 
(genres/styles) in expression are common.
    Our current system has promoted the notion of individual invention 
beyond the actual.
    In the open-source movement we are seeing a large amount of people 
applying themselves to a fairly narrow range of questions.. The overlap 
becomes more apparent..

    The argument of the similarity of the tools requisite for 
programming is not large enough in scope. The entire world is built on a 
set of rules - far more complex than current programming - but no less 
strict. Any system of this nature will only have X number of solutions - 
it's just that software has less and is easier to understand this way..

    The required pre-knowledge of patents is noticed as something that 
should be addressed - but to simply remove software from the 
considerations does not address the complaint. Given the example, it 
would be considered reasonable to engage a patent lawyer before any 
attempt at creating something as long as it's not software..
   
    I like this quote:

"There is no sensible means of reconciling an industry that has
massive independent invention with a law that makes independent
invention a liability."

    What would be some examples of things that everyone does?
    Everyone cooks - and I don't see anyone patenting recipes..

Aloha!
-sándor