Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
> Ken, the impression you give is that the UK no longer grants > software patents. You'll probably find if you look at the detail that they include a standard form of words to get around the fact that software "as such" is not patentable: instead you patent a machine configured by software to perform a particular task. Such circumlocutions have been disallowed by the courts in the past, but the boundaries are unclear. (It's harder, incidentally, to use this workaround to get patents on business processes). > What is more to the point, do you really think that the above such > applications shouldn't be allowed? I think they shouldn't; or at any rate, the rights awarded to the patent holder should be drastically reduced. For the following main reasons: (a) there is no practical way when writing software of ensuring that it does not infringe patents (b) there is more public benefit in allowing ideas to be shared and developed than in allowing them to be monopolized. There is no evidence that disallowing patents in software (unlike, say, in pharmaceuticals) would slow the pace of innovation. (c) copyright protection is adequate. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
|
