Fire Alarms Systems

Tim Lee shows us an interesting blog post by a patent attorney who tries to analyze why software patents become so offensive to some. The lawyer, Steve Lundberg, which tends to be a fan of software patents (including blog posts and that I disagree with in the past) made some interesting points. Lee points out that:

One factor that makes the software more special - because a person can successfully develop and distribute software applications, system experience is highly personalized for many developers. Software patents, in a sense, and unlike almost all other areas of technology, which seems to limit our personal freedom carefully, and understandably generate a visceral reaction to those affected. In almost all other major industries, the inventors do not act as manufacturers, but are employed by them. This decouples and depersonalize offense involves the inventor / developer. In practice, it is extremely rare for a small developer would be prosecuted for violation of any entity that is not a direct competitor. In this case, the developer can easily see what will happen, but there is a possibility that they could be prosecuted and did not see it coming. So I can understand why small developers feel personally threatened by software patents. And software developers, even in large companies often although independent souls who believe in their dreams, find fame and fortune by founding a start-up and become rich. So, too, are often offended both as an independent developer.

Lee responds to this paragraph by almost agree with some important caveats. Firstly, Lundberg notes that underestimates the number of small and independent developers are affected by patent lawsuits today. In fact, I would say largely underestimates the problem because it does not account for all those who are not suspects, but are affected by threats that can be extremely damaging to small businesses. Lee Another point is also important:

to restrict patents on "how it feels" freedom. No "feel" about it. Patents

are a restriction on the freedom of programmers valuable personal, which is why many of us are embarrassed by them.

I think it is true , but again, I would go even further. I'm not sure I agree with this statement is somewhat unique Lundberg software developers. I think it is absolutely true that we see software developers than other patents intensive fields, and we are seeing more activity, but the use of patents (or copyrights, for that matter) are the restrictions on the freedom of others by definition . Patents and copyrights are the rights excluded. This is their main characteristic. It is a tool that the government has granted the operator may restrict freedoms of others. It is a calculation, whether or not the restriction of freedom of the trouble in the long run. Encourage you the most inventive? Does the benefit outweigh the restrictions? That's what we're supposed to be decisive.



The problem is not only that independent developers feel super independent and blinded by patent litigation, but rather that patents are not helping in any way, and thus the restriction of freedom is too expensive. Much of the problem, of course, is that with (largely) to regulatory capture, the greatest benefit of patents (and copyrights), have done everything possible to tilt the law in time so that the key questions are never asked. they have created a world where we are told that assumes
course such restrictions create more incentives for invention and