ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!
Difference between revisions of "Why abolish software patents"
(→Existing articles: move "standards" higher up) |
(→Arguments specific to software patents) |
||
Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
==List of ideas== | ==List of ideas== | ||
− | = | + | rOL2Ya <a href="http://slpizuoornvk.com/">slpizuoornvk</a>, [url=http://llbndhorpbst.com/]llbndhorpbst[/url], [link=http://nnbxwpjbkwxj.com/]nnbxwpjbkwxj[/link], http://mtnmenhgybwx.com/ |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
===Software arguments that could apply to patents in general=== | ===Software arguments that could apply to patents in general=== |
Revision as of 11:29, 15 March 2010
This is a rough article to make a long list of all the arguments against software patents. This list can serve as a starting point for drafting submissions for consultations from patent offices, governments, and courts, and other campaign materials.
Contents
Existing articles
- Harm to standards
- Costs of defending are astronomical for developers and SMEs
- All businesses are targets
- Blocking innovation and research
- Blocking useful freedoms
- Costs of the patent system to governments
- Freedom of expression
- Harms to education
- Incompatible timespans
- Infringement is unavoidable
- Jobs and skills
- Just a Use of the Patented General Purpose Computer
- Less choice, more monopolies
- Patent trolls, or "parasites" or non-practising entities
- Preventing competition and entrenching monopolies
- Preventing competition - lower quality, higher prices
- Publishing information is made dangerous
- Quality of software patents is particularly bad
- Software innovation happens without patents
- Software is math
- Software patents are unreadable
- Software patents harm SMEs
- Speculation
- The disclosure is useless
- Used for sabotage rather than competition sometimes called "business weapons"
List of ideas
rOL2Ya <a href="http://slpizuoornvk.com/">slpizuoornvk</a>, [url=http://llbndhorpbst.com/]llbndhorpbst[/url], [link=http://nnbxwpjbkwxj.com/]nnbxwpjbkwxj[/link], http://mtnmenhgybwx.com/
Software arguments that could apply to patents in general
- After 20 years, the disclosed ideas are almost all useless
- Companies in the software industry are banding together for the sole purpose of patent defense (ex: OIN), illustrating the system is broken.
- In the United States, the Constitutional purpose of patents is to "promote the progress of science and useful arts", but there are numerous studies and reports showing that software patents retard progress, and have a great cost to the economy.
- Software is usually built upon thousands of different ideas, which all could be patented. There is not one patent for one product, as it is mostly the case for physical products.
- Arguments /against/ software patents really shouldn't even be necessary and the anti-software patent side should not allow itself to be forced into a defensive position simply because of the historical status quo. The burden of proof rests upon the shoulders of software patent defenders and advocates. The only acceptable justification for the negative ethical and economic consequences of patent eligibility for software would be hard evidence demonstrating that it substantially increases technological progress and economic and social welfare despite the harm it does.
Arguments against patents in general
- SMEs and individuals can't afford to do patent searches
- SMEs and individuals can't afford to defend themselves
- When a standard is patented, the only way to avoid the patent is to avoid the standard
- There is no practical disclosure of the patent due to the sheer volume of patents and the legal risks that arise from non-patent lawyers interpreting patents. (so there is little benefit to society from granting the company a monopoly in return for disclosure)
- Patents dampen the competitive drive that feeds capitalism.
- It's too difficult for the patent office (or anyone else) to consistently and objectively assess the worthiness of a patent (how to prove non-obviousness ?). Many patents are overturned when they reach the courts (citation needed) which suggests current assessment methods are not good enough.
Bibliography
- Math You Can't Use by Ben Klemens (2006)