Software patents [Was:Re: Oracle intersted in buying Ubunutu]

[Robert McWilliam]

On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 23:22:55 +1000, "Alexander Jacob Tsykin"
<stsykin at gmail.com> said:
> The companies are not interested in the industry as a whole, nor
> should they be. Their job is to make a profit. Sometimes the best way
> for them to do this legally is through patents. There are of course
> limits. I do not believe in patented vague general ideas. I do believe
> in the right to patent specific ones, sometimes. And certainly, code
> should be patentable.
>

I can understand the attraction of patents to the people who get them -
being granted a monopoly has obvious attractions. But a company should
be interested in the industry as a whole: Even if you're market share
goes down so long as it is by a smaller % than the industry grows you're
sales go up. 

Why should code be patentable? To stop other people copying it?
Copyright already does that. Patents on software that aren't merely an
expensive duplication of copyright have to be on ideas. 

What are the sometimes when an idea gets to be patented? And does this
fringe case justify the stifling of innovation in the rest of the
software world?

Robert
------------------ 
  Robert McWilliam
  rmcw at allmail.net
  www.ormiret.com

  The days of the digital watch are numbered.