|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 11 2012 @ 01:40 PM EDT |
Not all mathematical algorithms is computer software.
And computer software is more then the algorithms (code) that it's composed of.
It represents someone's intention to solve a real world problem. It makes a
computer more useful. It adds value. Why can't that value be protected?
In fact the patent system exists to protect the useful implementation of
original ideas. It "stimulates" innovation.
The problem with software patents and innovation is that there are only a
handful of ways to solve problems and describe describe system functionality,
and the distinctions in the implementation or often glossed over with algorithm
like descriptions. The specific nature of computers and virtual machines and
the mechanisms in the machine are deliberately left vague in ways that a
mechanical machine patent would be declared invalid. The concept of virtual
mechanism is left as an idea rather than specific.
If you want to argue that the patent system is broken and needs reform, I am
perfectly comfortable with that position. I don't believe the problem is unique
to software patents. There was a machine vision patent troll out and about at
one point that perfectly describes the problem.
http://www.photonics.com/Article.aspx?AID=10266 The main problem IMO is that
disputes normally boil down to use of terms rather then ideas or originality.
In my opinion, there is another real reason society will not let go of patents.
They represent Intellectual Property, an asset with a real dollar value
associated. In a world where the stocks of a company depend on speculation of
value, the speculation in the values of patents is supportive of stock value,
even where the patents only real value is litigative. The rules of the
game...
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
