Software patents and FreeBSD

[R. Tyler Ballance]

> There is absolutely nothing inherently evil about so-called  
> "software patents." If an invention has honestly been made then it  
> makes no difference whatsoever if its implemented in software or  
> with gears and levers, the inventor deserves protection.
>
> The problem lies with the Patent Office for issuing patents for  
> prior art. Funniest example I know of is "Method of Exercising a  
> Cat" http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5443036.html. Its a laser  
> pointer. Who hasn't played with a cat using a flashlight or mirror  
> before laser pointers were invented?

Doesn't the fact that the patent office is unable to check for prior  
art make software patents inherently evil? There is almost no  
plausible way, given the nature of the internet, to check for prior  
art in software. Especially if companies are trying to patent  
computing concepts, like email, or a web server, etc.

>
> Another example is that the Patent Office used to new patents for  
> old technology simply because the new claim specified a 10" disk  
> drive rather than 12". This silliness was mostly resolved between  
> 5-1/4" and 3-1/2".


There is nothing wrong with being compensated for ones work, and own  
ideas; but given that in the new world of computing and software  
(relatively) it's damn near impossible to make sure that it is your  
_own_ ideas and work that you're trying to patent and play off as  
your own.

-R. Tyler Ballance