• Debating Software Patents with Brett Roberts
• Wednesday, October 20 2010 @ 11:16 AM EDT
• Peter Harrison: First let me thank Brett for taking up the challenge at such short notice. The debate simply would not have been the same without his frank and passionate defense of patents. We may not sit on the same side of the fence in terms of our views, but we have enjoyed challenging each others views in public on many occasions. The debate would be no exception.

  I argued that software patents stifle innovation. When ideas are copied, extended, built upon - we all benefit. Patents stop this and thus stifle innovation. He argued that patents not necessary to protect industries based on ideas e.g. publishing because copyright does a good job. He pointed to the negative impacts of software patents such as the Android litigation which is stifling competition.

  Brett argued that patents are considered useful by large multi-national companies that employ millions of people and generate billions in revenue. Apple likes patents and it gave us the iPhone. Some companies supporting software patents pay more for licensing patents than they receive from them. Claimed that for every case of a public patent dispute, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of cases which are amicably settled that we never hear about. The tip of a very large iceberg. Important that inventors get the choice of the IP protection that suits them - including patents. Argued that patents provide a way for the smallest of inventors to deal with the largest of companies. Suggested that patents level the playing field quite dramatically. Innovation is invention plus commercialisation. Investors will look favourably on patents. May be a prerequisite.

  I continue to argue that patents are a bad idea - easy to see by looking at the impact if they were applied to the book publishing industry. Constant risk of patent infringement when writing. As it is with software - you cannot write any reasonably sized piece of software without the risk of being sued for patent infringement. Android being sued for patent infringement is a bad thing. Software patents used as a weapon against competition. No requirement to be reasonable or fair. Fear of litigation can be used to prevent investment in competition. Word processing storing data as XML patented - which is ridiculous given that XML is for the storage and exchange of information. This patent used against Abiword. Graphene example - the inventor has tried to patent it. Went to one of the largest electronic companies to see about licencing. They said they would throw a hundred patent lawyers at it and patent all around it and they're going to put him into litigation until he's dead. Stacker - disk compression utility. Microsoft treated the smaller company very unfairly. Naive to assume large companies will treat small companies well. [PJ: Links on the page to YouTube of the debate.] - NZ Open Source Society

On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 07:48 +1000, Steven Sackett wrote:

Hi Ben,
do you monitor this blog?
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2010092621054289
regards
steven

Thanks Steven, I don't follow that one but will try and keep an eye on
it in future. Do let me know if you spot anything else interesting.

Cheers,
Ben


_______________________________________________
Free-software-melb mailing list
Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au
http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb