Joinup has a summary from discussion about software patents: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/community/osor/news/software-patents-should-incl...
Next week I will be in a panel discussion with the European Patent Office at Cebit, and I am interested in your opinion about the article.
Regards, Matthias
On 03/03/2014 10:55 AM, Matthias Kirschner wrote:
Joinup has a summary from discussion about software patents: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/community/osor/news/software-patents-should-incl...
Next week I will be in a panel discussion with the European Patent Office at Cebit, and I am interested in your opinion about the article.
My opinion:
It *might* raise standards if software patents were to include source code and *might* reduce the totally frivolous patent applications, but I think Mirko Boehm's argument misses the point that software should never be patented at all. The argument is the usual, which is actually also the reason why it was traditionally excluded from patentability: Software is *thought*, it's ultimately an expression of abstract mathematical ideas, and you can't patent mathematical ideas.
Furthermore, I disagree with Boehm's statement that: "The most-recent ground-breaking software development was Quicksort. It was invented in 1960."
Maybe in terms of algorithmics, but then there's still the RSA algorithm and a number of other things. But all the Internet protocols (including email and the Web) and graphical user interface paradigms might also be considered some sort of software breakthrough, and they're definitely post 1960. :-)
I thus agree entirely with Carlo Piana's statements near the end of the article.
Best, Carsten
* Carsten Agger agger@modspil.dk [2014-03-03 11:07:47 +0100]:
Furthermore, I disagree with Boehm's statement that: "The most-recent ground-breaking software development was Quicksort. It was invented in 1960."
About this part. Have you seen: "The Most Important Software Innovations" by David A. Wheeler. http://www.dwheeler.com/innovation/innovation.html
Regards, Matthias
On 03/03/2014 11:13 AM, Matthias Kirschner wrote:
- Carsten Agger agger@modspil.dk [2014-03-03 11:07:47 +0100]:
Furthermore, I disagree with Boehm's statement that: "The most-recent ground-breaking software development was Quicksort. It was invented in 1960."
About this part. Have you seen: "The Most Important Software Innovations" by David A. Wheeler. http://www.dwheeler.com/innovation/innovation.html
No, thanks, that looks like a really interesting overview!
A 03-03-2014 10:55, Matthias Kirschner escrigué:
Joinup has a summary from discussion about software patents: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/community/osor/news/software-patents-should-incl...
Next week I will be in a panel discussion with the European Patent Office at Cebit, and I am interested in your opinion about the article.
Regards, Matthias
I know many people don't understand or agree with this basic epistemology, but software is immaterial. It's more or less what they mean when they say it's "thought". What software is has nothing to do with any physical force, magnitude or matter. The same that any software says (and therefore does, because a program is just an explanation on how to solve a problem with a computer) is maintained if you change all physical details of support or computer running it.
A patent is a deal whereas society (we all) give away our freedom to commerce on an invention in exchange for information about an invention (that otherwise we assume ther would not exist or would not be public). You keep the exclusive use of your invention if you give away all relevant information on the invention.
Inventions have never in Europe included software. Inventions are physical, material, are methods of using forces of nature to your benefits. If you try to force software to be regarded as an invention you reach a fundamental contradiction, because software is information, you can't make the invention be information, so now the deal is : You keep the exclusive use your information if you give away all relevant information on the information.
The contradiction appears clearly. Either you publish the relevant information (source open) and don't patent or you patent without disclosing anythign meaningful Software patents will never have full disclosure . The patent system is inconsistent applied to software. Economic or political opinion does not matter. It's essentially flawed, not amtter anyone's colorful ideas.