A Brief History of Software Patents (And Why They’re Valid)
Unfortunately, the policy debates today about
“software patents” are rife with extensive confusion and
misinformation about what these patents are and even about what “software” is.
“software patents” are rife with extensive confusion and
misinformation about what these patents are and even about what “software” is.
Most in the software industry didn't call for patent protection laws and most still think it is not beneficial to the industry.
The industry prospered without patent protection from inception.
It wasn't broken.
It didn't need to be fixed by lawyers, judges, and politicians.
The linked document is the opinion of a "scholar" who has vested interest in expansion of patent law.
Cui Bono.
Articles written by a representative of the legal system are unconvincing and potentially biased.
In my opinion, the source of this article is biased.
I find no fault in Dale wanting to make the system work to encourage innovation and reward innovators.
Reforming the system must be done to benefit innovation in the industry and to encourage productivity by tens of thousands of software creators.
Shoving the "right" answer down the throats of productive people does not promote innovation and productivity. It suppresses productivity and competition.
"Articles written by a representative of the legal system are unconvincing and potentially biased." sigh. Adam Mossoff is an Objectivist who writes for ARI and gives talks there. You are on an Objectivist website. what kind of "experts" are you looking for?
Not interested in an argument with you on this.
Regardless of my experience it is of no account to you, but someone who benefits from the patent business is above reproach. You trust the author's opinion; I do not.
You have your opinion (bias), I have mine, and the author has his. I have no vested interest in the business of patent law.