From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Sat Mar 08 2003 - 22:06:06 MST
Brett Paatsch wrote:
> Lee Daniel Crocker writes:
>
>
>>First of all, let's change the rules: the burden of proof is on
>>those who wish to support patents, not those who wish to
>>remove them, because freedom should always be the default.
>
> .
>
>>Patents reduce freedom.
>
> .
Let's say it differently then. Patents reduce the ability to
innovate and to extend previous innovations. This is seen
especially clearly in the case of software patents. If I did a
reasonably complete patent search every time I designed and
implemented a new system the legal cost would kill most of the
projects before the design had even gelled. Voluntary licensing
and variable fees many that companies and individuals can
prohibit would be competitors from even entering the game. We
all lose by this. Even fixed priced mandatory licensing
introduce substantial drag and impetus to twist designs to avoid
the additional costs.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 08 2003 - 22:05:27 MST