There are tens of thousands of software patents granted every year in the U.S.,
even though all of them should be (in a sane world) considered invalid even
under the currently existing rules. Even if it made sense to allow patent
owners to monopolize algorithms and ideas (it doesn't), the vast majority of
software patents would still not be very deserving of any kind of monopoly: they
just cover the ordinary work product of programmers.
Data compression
(lossless, video compression, etc.) is a good example of an area which is
entirely mathematical, it has no physical manifestation whatsoever, and there
have been so many patents on fundamental algorithmic building blocks that it
completely retarded progress in those areas for a decade or longer.
See, for example, this partial list of data
compression patents.
The harm that software patents do every year is
ENORMOUS. They waste huge amounts on litigation and cross-licensing, allow
large companies to force smaller competitors out of business, and cause a
chilling effect on anybody who writes software (at least within the U.S.)
There is no possible sane justification for them, other than to retard
progress and enrich parasitic lawyers. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|