Comments on: Lawsuit: Software should not be copyrighted

An intellectual-property consultant says that software makers can protect their products adequately through patents.

Hey have it backwards

It is software patents that are destroying the software industry, not copyrights.

[RavingEniac]

Re: They have it backwards---I agree

It is patents and proposed additional patent laws that impede independent software development, not copyright laws. Only software shops with armies of lawyers can feel reasonably safe from patent claims of corporations, even though a piece of software is independently conceived, developed and coded. Even math methods, which are derived from existing math knowledge, can be patentable and turned into software. I should patent "2 + 2 = 4" and get paid every time an elementary-school kid does his or her math. I could claim that "2 + 4 = 6" is a derivative work. I could give students a great excuse for not doing their homework: "Sorry, teach, the solution is patented." Think I'm kidding? Recall the patent on GIFs which stood for about 20 years. And it was just a lucky break that the prof who figured out the math method on which the JPG graphics format is based didn't patent his work. I knew him, a good guy, someone who should be honored by the industry, but darnit, patents should not apply to stuff like that.

[RavingEniac]

Re: They have it backwards

In other words, keep the copyright protection and scrap the patent protection!

Nice so i can copy anything for my homework

I can argue that since software isn't copyrighted. iI will just use
other people's code. Its the same as my own code. i will get
100% on all my assignments!! nice!! hahaha.
What a dump idea haahha.

Software Patents should be revoked

Probably most all software patents should be revoked. Anyone who codes software knows that given a certain problem often only certain paths of solution are possible. In many cases given prior to the existance of computers if someone had been given the same problem and they derived a solution on paper, I highly doubt that the Patent Office would have accepted it.

From my experience in the industry patents are often only used as a defense mechanism against some other company coming after you for violating their patents. This is a silly game. Copyrights should be sufficient and at that their lifespan be rolled back to original 27 year and one renewal.

Unwise in the light of EU movements

I think that Greg Aharonian's 'mission' to only use Software patents for protection is most unwise in light of the EU Parliament and Commission's stance on software patents. It currently looks as thought software patents are going to be outlawed in all countries in the EU. Intellectual Property in the US will then only have the protection of Copyright treaties with EU memebr countries. If that is removed then *anyone* who gets hold of US software within Western Europe is legally allowed to rework and resell it. This could be a very bad thing for US Software houses.

[Stomfi]

Open Patents

The GPL and the others apply to the international community, allowing the sharing of code for the good of all, promoting free trade and innovation.
Is it possible to have an International and Open Patent on software?
Could such a patent perform the same task as the GPL?
Or is this another strategy by the opposers of the humanitarium FOSS movement, designed to kill it off?
Stomfi