Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:
When you imitating a solution (either aware of it or not) you're having more or less the same amount of effort the original solver had since you're probably not even doing it the same way.
OK. But in my terminology, you're not imitating, you're looking for an alternative since the solution is not essentially the same.
When you're copying the solution, you only had the work of copying (almost zero, normally)... that is, you copied and relaunched as yours...
OK. And what if you make small modifications, for example making it out of plastic instead of metal?
Why is your effort worth it, and not the others'?
Basically, because I'm the first and I told the world how to avoid having to imitate the solution.
Is there any reason your idea would *only*come*from*you*?
Probably not. But without the incentive offered by the patent, is there any reason anyone would reveal the details of the idea?
Well, I also think that if you find a different implementation of the same inventive idea in hardware, the patent holder should be able to stop you. Just like with software. If it's a new solution, you're in the clear. If it's just a different realization, you're infringing.
You're the only one selling potatoes. Someone decides to sell potatoes too. Make some money, maybe even sell cheaper, etc.. in the end, the consumer benefits.
Why should your business monopoly be protected by law?
Selling potatoes isn't novel. If I tell the world something technically novel and practically useful, it helps the progress of science, and I should be rewarded. I like the idea of rewarding people with a monopoly.
Well, what you're saying is that 'inventions' in software do not actually exist until they're built in hardware. The comparison with science fiction springs to mind: Star Trek would not be prior art against someone building a matter transporter. But if Gene ever had explained how you could build one, you could no longer patent the general concept of matter transporters.
You could *NEVER* patent "a" matter transporter. You can only patent *THIS* matter transporter.
That's what you're missing. Software is not matter...
If I'm the first to invent a particular matter transporter, then I'm also the first to invent _the_ matter transporter. It wasn't there before. I made it, and so I should have the patent to it. Just like Edison patented the lightbulb.
If one particular matter transporter already exists, I can no longer patent _the_ matter transporter, just particular implementations.
Kind regards,
Arnoud Engelfriet