Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Poll: Do you support software patents?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 319 posts

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#101

Post by jcromartie »

rlpb wrote: post #92
mrcharles wrote: post #16

I can't stand the idea that I might be at my computer, working with code, and develop something independently which later causes me to get sued. Abolish all software patents. edited to add "software".

Fixing your problem would only need the current system to be modified such that independent invention is not infringing. One way, for example, is to make it permissible for independent invention to be considered evidence that the patent is obvious to those skilled in the art and thus not patentable. A patent already granted would be repealed under these circumstances. Would you still be in favour of abolishment, and…

How would you prove an "independent" invention was really developed independently of the patent? You can't prove that someone didn't read something.

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#102

Post by AlexC04 »

patio11 wrote: post #63

This is one of those issues that I feel is more a member of tribal affiliation than anything substantive. It's like flag burning for us Republicans: if I were to rank order my political objectives, "prevent flag burning" would be somewhere in the x0,000s, but the tribe cares about this a lot for philosophical reasons (which I'm broadly speaking on board with) and as a result uses it as a signaling mechanism. Software…

Your discussion of "Tribe Signalling" is interesting. It reminds me of all the stuff that Desmond Morris was talking about in "the Human Animal" (and more recently http://www.exactitudes.com/). By wearing certain clothes you're sending a signal to others about political POV, likes dislikes, interests etc... It helps you find other like minded individuals.

Maybe you're right that being against software patents is generally a tribal signal that says "I'm a hacker" or "computer-type".

When I logged into the comment thread, I was thinking the exact same sort of thing. "Well Duh"

The Hacker News audience is somewhere near 100% the exact demographic that you'd expect to be generally against software patents.

It's like logging on to a Twilight fan-board and asking "Are vampires Awesome?"

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#104

Post by dustbyrn »

We who invent things, we who solve problems in new ways, don't do so because we can get a patent. We solve the problem because when you put a problem in front of us, we can't stop ourselves from solving it. It haunts us. We dream about it. And the only way to make it go away is to solve it. That's the nature of Engineers, the nature of Inventors. Engineers don't think about patents when presented with a problem, they think about solutions. Lawyers think about patents and they don't invent anything.

You might have a better idea than the last guy, but chances are your idea overlaps with his a little. If your new idea has some similarities with an exiting patented idea, implementing it could be risky. If engineers did a patent search for every idea they had, they would find some overlap with existing patents every single time. Nothing would ever get created. The true evil of patents is that they actually stifle, rather than promote, innovation. The effect of patents is opposite their intent.

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#105

Post by ericHosick »

cperciva wrote: post #17
ericHosick wrote: post #8

I've spent the last few years working on a new approach to developing software. I've spent a lot of my own money (at least $40,000 USD) on research to perfect it. Currently, from the research I've done, I've found no prior art. Should I be able to patent this technology? Should I just release it? If I just release it, wouldn't a large company patent aspects of it and sue me for infringement (it costs $ to prove prior…

Should I be able to patent this technology? Should I just release it? If I just release it, wouldn't a large company patent aspects of it and sue me for infringement (it costs $ to prove prior art). If you publish your code, it becomes prior art. It doesn't cost much to stand up in court and say "uh, look guys, this code you're suing me over was published before you applied for your patent", and the case would be thr…

I would hope it would be easy to show prior art, but stuff like this (http://m.theregister.co.uk/2011/04/21/texas_jury_says_google...) is where it becomes "hard" to prove prior art. Because you have to prove it against a jury of, generally, non-technical people. Here is the primary claim:

* a linked list to store and provide access to records stored in a memory of the system, at least some of the records automatically expiring

a record search means utilizing a search key to access the linked list

the record search means including a means for identifying and removing at least some of the expired ones of the records from the linked list when the linked list is accessed

* a means – utilizing the record search means – for accessing the linked list and, at the same time, removing at least some of the expired ones of the records in the linked list

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#106

Post by rglover »

I'm surprised things like business process patents aren't more widely supported. Especially in the software industry, it's pretty obvious that most applications are the result of somebody developing (or at least, think their developing) a better method for accomplishing an existing task. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't business process patents enable similar ideas organized differently to equally receive patents? It's truly difficult to lean either way (however, I did vote for the abolishment of all patents). If you're a successful business who is challenged for your innovation, the only protection you really have is a patent. If anything, I feel like those in the software industry should form some sort of agreement and petition the government to enact new rules specifically for this industry. As technology evolves, I shudder at the thought of how the archaic system we have now will all but crumble. There should be a lot more future-proofing taking place.

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#107

Post by jobeirne »

kenjackson wrote: post #82
albedoa wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This John Carmack quote is relevant and shares your sentiments: "The idea that I can be presented with a problem, set out to logically solve it with the tools at hand, and wind up with a program that could not be legally used because someone else followed the same logical steps some years ago and filed for a patent on it is horrifying." http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_D._Carmack

In theory that shouldn't be patentable. What John Carmack is describing is something that is obvious to a craftsperson in the field. OTOH it does still preclude John from being presented with a problem and then doing someone quite ingenious to do a great solution that seems actually quite "novel", to learn that someone else did it years before. But for patents, if you follow logical steps from a given problem then yo…

> In fact the way patents should work is that the patent officer spends a week trying to solve said problem themselves.

Does that really sound at all scalable (or even reasonable) to you?

I imagine that many of the proposals that move through the patent office are highly contextual and may be simple ideas wrapped up in daunting language. It seems reasonable that it would take far more than a week to even get your arms around some of the problems themselves, let alone the solutions.

Besides, if patent officers were such able critics, wouldn't they be more useful as engineers?

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#108

Post by dfox »

My take on this is: Abolish all patents (not only software).

Patent system simply does not serve it's purpose (which ws to motivate inventors to publish they ideas, so they could be later reused) as patents are intentionally written as to be unreadable and uninformative. And this happens not only in "software" or "business method" ones.

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#109

Post by coffeeaddicted »

anamax wrote: post #36
mrcharles wrote: post #16

I can't stand the idea that I might be at my computer, working with code, and develop something independently which later causes me to get sued. Abolish all software patents. edited to add "software".

> I can't stand the idea that I might be at my computer, working with code, and develop something independently which later causes me to get sued. Abolish all patents. I can't stand the idea that I might be in my shop/lab, working with metal/wood/plastic/chemicals, and develop something independently which later causes me to get sued. Abolish all patents.

You'd have to ask the people in the corresponding industries what they think about it. Patents might not have the same effects in other industries. We have on hacker news obviously mostly experiences with software-patents. From what I've read similar patent discussions are indeed also happening in other industries like in pharmaceutical research as advancements there also often blocked by patents, which is just the opposite of what was the original reason for the patent system.

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#110

Post by 6ren »

Imagine a Book of Code, like Knuth's Art of Programming, but easier to search and understand.

If you come up with something new, and write it up clearly enough, it can go into The Book. You get royalties for X number of years (maybe 5? idk). Everyone uses this as a resource. Perhaps there's ARIA-like licensing (where a cafe pays a standard rate to play any music they like), for usages based on how many people use it (so a small software shop pays a small annual fee, and google pays huge fees) - or more likely the owner sets the price. Like an app-store for algorithms. After X years, it becomes free.

The patent system is nothing like this. I'm not sure it's even technically possible, though certainly textbooks get written and some of them are excellent (perhaps with financial motivation, you could employ people like David Flanagan writing up algorithms).

Having such a Book would being programming much closer to an engineering discipline. It would also make contributing to the Book a badge of professional honour, and not disparaged as patents are today. Really, anyone who invents a new and useful approach should be lauded - but the patent system has strayed far from this.

Post reply on HN