Poll: Do you support software patents? • Hacker News Board

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#171

Post by 3pt14159 » Mon, May 16, 2011, 7:07 PM UTC

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…

Until someone sues you for patent infringement. You have enough opensource stuff out there they wouldn't even need to look hard for it.

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#172

Post by Sindisil » Mon, May 16, 2011, 7:09 PM UTC

mbreese wrote: post #145

coffeeaddicted wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And not only you might accidentally break patents - you might not even be able to figure out if you break patents at all without paying a lawyer to translate the patent specifications. Maybe it's just because I'm no native english speaker, but I often don't get patent texts. Coding around patents is like walking blindfolded through a minefield.

One could argue that you shouldn't code around patents in the first go round. Because if you demonstrate that you knew about the patent and then proceeded to infringe on it, you could be liable for 3X the amount. If you don't know about the patent, then you're only liable for 1X the amount. Moral of the story: don't read patents, you can only get into trouble. If you get sued after the fact, then you can change your…

Yup. The quasi-official policy at some places I've worked is that engineers are not to browse the patent database, for exactly that reason.

Ironic, given one of the original primary reasons for the patent system.

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#173

Post by nkassis » Mon, May 16, 2011, 7:11 PM UTC

dspillett wrote: post #88

jcromartie wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except it's even worse than that: usually patent trolls haven't even written the code to solve the problem. Working code is not required to be granted a patent.

And they could file for the patent after you have done the work. You then have the hassle and expense of proving that your work came first and even then such cases often don't go the way they should.

I great example of the trouble someone had to go to prove they were first is the ABC computer. It's an important case if you consider that without John Atanasoff the personal computer would never have existed. At the time IBM and some other corp I can't remember the name held some important patent on memory and other things that would prevent anyone from creating a personal computer without paying IBM. Those patents which had come from the creators of ENIAC were later found to have been heavely (well in reality stolen) from the ABC computer. After years of battles, IBM lost the patents and right after that the PC came to be.

For a worse horror story, just take a look at Farnsworth trouble with RCA about the TV patents.

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#174

Post by guelo » Mon, May 16, 2011, 7:15 PM UTC

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…

This is not a "signaling" issue, it is hugely important. One of the few industries that has been generating tons of innovation and jobs over the last 20 years is under constant attack from stupid patents, but you think that is less important than banning flag burning?

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#175

Post by olalonde » Mon, May 16, 2011, 7:19 PM UTC

petegrif wrote: post #170

I think the problem here stems from the fact that people talk as if "software" were one homogenous entity. But as we all know - it isn't. Some software is trivial and some isn't. Some represents a trifling investment and some a huge investment of time and dollars. Some is very easy to copy and some much harder. It is only when we start thinking about such categories that we can make real progress thinking about where…

> If you don't get patent protection you are left with (a) trade secret (b) copyright.

You forgot "(c) First-mover advantage"[1], which is historically very effective at rewarding innovators.

Without our current patent system, I'm fairly confident innovators would come up with clever ways of capitalizing on their ideas despite those ideas being easy to duplicate. Of course, it wouldn't be a perfect system either, but in my opinion a much better one.

PS: Up voted you as I believe you are making and interesting point which is worth debating. I wish people would stop down voting comments they disagree with.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-mover_advantage

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#176

Post by bostonpete » Mon, May 16, 2011, 7:20 PM UTC

burgerbrain wrote: post #167

bostonpete wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Software is an application of mathematical equations perhaps, but then hardware is an application of material properties and other laws of physics. Since material properties and laws of physics can't be patented, you're presumably against hardware patents as well?

The capability of modelling a physical system with math does not mean that physical systems are math. On the other hand, the numerous proofs that software is math are fairly trivial for anyone with a modest background in mathematics.

> The capability of modelling a physical system with math does not mean that physical systems are math.

It's the modeling of physical systems that its patented, not the physical object itself. Those patents usually protect the inventor from people creating any number of variations on their exact design because it's the approach to solving a particular problem that is being patented.

I think there are a lot of people who take an absolute position against software patents and end up going through all sorts of contortions to differentiate between why ideas in the physical realm should be protected and ideas in the software realm should not.

That said, I certainly agree that most software patents are far too obvious and not deserving of any sort of protection. The challenge, of course, is how to fix the system to afford protections to real innovators and not to those who simply connect the dots.

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#177

Post by barrkel » Mon, May 16, 2011, 7:22 PM UTC

notJim wrote: post #163

barrkel wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how software patents work in practice. They are written to be as broad and non-specific as possible, because their purpose is to be legal weapons. They are not about spreading innovation; competition, in functioning markets, is sufficient for that.

I think patents can be (and have been) distorted to be used as weapons, but their real purpose is to help innovation as I described. The argument you're making is basically that the system right now is broken, so we should just throw it out. I do agree that it's broken, but I argue that fixing the system is a better solution than throwing it out.

The purpose of a patent system and the purposes of people using a patent system are two different things. The first one might motivate lawmakers; but it is the second one that actually matters.

Do you honestly believe there is such a problem with sharing innovation in the software industry, that we need government intervention to encourage sharing?

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#178

Post by jxcole » Mon, May 16, 2011, 7:27 PM UTC

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…

Couldn't disagree more. Sure, as a society of wanna-be/successful code entrepreneurs, we are more likely to be affected by this issue. But that doesn't mean the issue isn't substantive. It is more accurate to say that the majority of people outside of our "tribe" are simply unaware of patents and the type of burden it places on innovative thinking. Your argument essentially points to software patents being a non-issue. If that were true, we wouldn't be seeing well written websites taken down or extorted through the patent system.

I'm not just flag burning here. Privacy might be a better issue to put into the "tribal affiliation" buckets as I have heard of few real instances where privacy actually harmed a real person (I'm talking about stuff like google tracking your searches). As a developer, there is a real chance you will get sued over patents, and if you do there will be real damage done.

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#179

Post by msg » Mon, May 16, 2011, 7:27 PM UTC

I buy the argument that software is math and thus unpatentable. My experience has also been that most software patents (and especially always the most notorious) are trivial applications of an algorithm to some subject area.

But here's a more pragmatic argument.

The current patent system exists to provide financial incentive to bring the number of inventors in an untouched area from 0 to 1.

It is completely broken wherever it brings the number of innovators in an emerging area from 50 to 1.

The first case is probably true in any industry with high startup costs and unproven technology. The second case is true of software and services on the still young, still evolving internet, with low technological barriers to entry and fertile soil as far as the eyes can see.

If we want to see what innovators are really capable of, we'll get rid of software patents and watch them duke it out in the market.

Re: Poll: Do you support software patents?

#180

Post by jxcole » Mon, May 16, 2011, 7:32 PM UTC

petegrif wrote: post #170

I think the problem here stems from the fact that people talk as if "software" were one homogenous entity. But as we all know - it isn't. Some software is trivial and some isn't. Some represents a trifling investment and some a huge investment of time and dollars. Some is very easy to copy and some much harder. It is only when we start thinking about such categories that we can make real progress thinking about where…

In general, software is EITHER trivial to copy OR the problem is non-trivial. I would be surprised to hear of any patents covering something that falls into both categories.