ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

Difference between revisions of "20 years is too long"

(External links: ** [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/amazon-rms-tim.html Amazon Letter from RMS to Tim O'Reilly], 11 Mar 2000, by '''Richard Stallman''')
(External links: (2001? or earlier))
Line 22: Line 22:
 
==External links==
 
==External links==
  
* [http://web.archive.org/web/20010802044125/www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/subst/misc/patents.html An Open Letter From Jeff Bezos On The Subject Of Patents], 2001, Jeff Bezos of [[Amazon]] suggests a 3-5 year term for [[software patents]]
+
* [http://web.archive.org/web/20010802044125/www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/subst/misc/patents.html An Open Letter From Jeff Bezos On The Subject Of Patents], (2001? or earlier), Jeff Bezos of [[Amazon]] suggests a 3-5 year term for [[software patents]]
 
** [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/amazon-rms-tim.html Amazon Letter from RMS to Tim O'Reilly], 11 Mar 2000, by '''[[Richard Stallman]]'''
 
** [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/amazon-rms-tim.html Amazon Letter from RMS to Tim O'Reilly], 11 Mar 2000, by '''[[Richard Stallman]]'''
  

Revision as of 05:08, 17 September 2010

Patent procedures are too slow, the uncertainty lasts too long, and patents last too long for software.

20 year duration of patents

Patents last for 20 years. This term has been set by TRIPS.

Patents exist to encourage researchers to publish their ideas. The researcher gets a temporary monopoly, and in return, society gets access to the idea when the patent expires.

In software, if you have to avoid using ideas from the past 20 years, your software will be useless. (See: Use software from 20 years ago)

Similarly, it doesn't take 20 years to figure out how a software package works, so the disclosure with a 20 year delay on your freedom to use the idea, is a pointless deal. (See: The disclosure is useless)

Time required for grant

In most countries, a granted patent is considered valid starting from the application date. This means Person A can apply for a patent, and Person B can develop a product. If Person B looks at all published patents, they will not see Person A's patent application which is still being processed. If Person A's application is approved, they can immediately accuse Person B of infringing the patent - despite Person B never having had any possibility to know that this idea was patented.

The unfair situation can happen in any field of development, but it's aggravated in the case of software because the development cycle of software is often very fast.

Post-grant changes

In the USA, patent applicants can continue to enlarge the patent within the first two years after it's granted.[1] So if Amazon searched all existing patents in 1999, and if they found that their 1-click shopping idea wasn't patented, they could still find themselves sued in 2000 or 2001 by someone who later expanded a patent granted after Amazon did its search.

External links

References