ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

Difference between revisions of "Analogies"

(Added a brief summary highlighting the very good Stallman literature analogy)
(Literature: by Richard Stallman (with Gérald Sédrati-Dinet))
Line 13: Line 13:
  
 
==Literature==
 
==Literature==
Excellent comparison by Richard Stallman on how easy it would have been for any of a number of patents to have destroyed great literary works (Les Miserables) much in the same way they are threatening and destroying software. Patents cover ideas so pre-empt fixed expressions.
+
 
* http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/software-literary-patents.html
+
A comparison by Richard Stallman (with Gérald Sédrati-Dinet) on how easy it would have been for any of a number of patents to have destroyed great literary works (such as Les Miserables) much in the same way they are threatening and destroying software. Patents cover ideas so pre-empt fixed expressions.
 +
* [http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/software-literary-patents.html Software Patents and Literary Patents] (first published in [http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2005/jun/23/onlinesupplement.insideit The Guardian])
  
 
[[Timothy B. Lee]], of The Cato Institute:
 
[[Timothy B. Lee]], of The Cato Institute:

Revision as of 10:08, 29 October 2010

There's no perfect explanation so it's useful to know a few analogies and ways to explain the problem and choose your explanation based on your situation.

Minefield

Richard Stallman has frequently mentioned this analogy in parts of his speeches:

With each step, probably nothing happens, but you have to take so many steps, there's no chance of getting across the minefield without stepping on one.

This analogy omits one aspect: when you step on a mine, the damage is instant. When you violate a patent, the patent holder may be aware and might threaten you immediately, or they might decide to let you continue to build your project on that idea and then threaten you later, or they might not be aware now but they will threaten you later when they become aware. This happens most consequently regarding standards. In this way, even if you get across the minefield, you still don't have certainty that you won't get blown up.

Literature

A comparison by Richard Stallman (with Gérald Sédrati-Dinet) on how easy it would have been for any of a number of patents to have destroyed great literary works (such as Les Miserables) much in the same way they are threatening and destroying software. Patents cover ideas so pre-empt fixed expressions.

Timothy B. Lee, of The Cato Institute:

In the 21st century, the idea of storyline patents has become a possible problem - but no patent office has yet granted any.

Music

Software is not unlike music. Writing software or music is a purely intellectual process, though both require some kind of machine to lend them expression. In both fields, very few individuals ever come up with totally original ideas, yet every composer or programmer has minor new ideas every day. In both fields, the ideas are highly abstract: how would one describe the idea of taking a musical theme and writing variations on it in patent lawyers' language? In both fields, independent invention without copying is not only a theoretical possibility, it happens frequently. In both fields, the test of what is "obvious" is completely subjective. Music, fortunately, is not troubled by patents. But this does not seem to have prevented composers from innovating.

By Chris Lale, January 2003:

Again citing Richard Stallman:

A "piano player" music reader

From the ruling on in re Alappat:

"As the player piano playing new music is not the stuff of patent law, neither is the mathematics that is Alappat’s “rasterizer.”"

An explanation of why a computer running new software is not a "new machine", just as a mechanical piano player playing new music isn't.

(see also: Computer plus software as new machine)

Toll booths on roads

Ciaran O'Riordan's explanation of how "software patents are like toll booths, at best, and road blocks, at worst":