|
|
|
| Authored by: PolR on Monday, March 11 2013 @ 05:08 AM EDT |
| I think this is the main point of sections D.1 and D.2 of the supplement. This
is presented in the form of an argument that there is no way for a software
author to clear all patent right to his/her own software. Then the choice is
between being a potential target for lawsuits or stop developing.
This is
also in suggested topic 2 in this form.
If software authors are
unable to clear all rights to their own products because there is no practical
way to do so, how can that foster progress and innovation? Rather it seems to
force developer, or the companies that hire them, to choose between developing
innovative products with the certainty that if it is successful, there will be
infringement lawsuits, or stop developing.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: mbouckaert on Monday, March 11 2013 @ 02:59 PM EDT |
Maybe we should spell out clearly one of the side-effects of
the misapplication of IP concepts:
By forcing a whole, growing, influential segment of the
population to actively ignore the law ("patents" in this
case) and, therefore, to ignore their legal "location", we
are very effectively weakening the rule of law (undermining
the "état de droit").
Legal thickets: Arbitrary enforcement of arbitrary speed
limits, on steroids.
---
bck[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
