Boston Linux & Unix (BLU) Home | Calendar | Mail Lists | List Archives | Desktop SIG | Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings
Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Blog | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU

BLU Discuss list archive


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Discuss] Self-introduction and more on software patent



Thanks to many kind notes from BLU members.  I believe what I have done
wrong is that I failed to introduce myself before speaking out.  So, here is
a little bit of myself.

I have a graduate degree in theoretical physics and done some real
computations using FORTRAN, C, and other/scripting languages.  As a
scientist, I unfortunately couldn't find any position to do science and/or
research.  Like everyone else, I need to eat and, luckily, I found a job in
the patent field.  That led me to pursue my law degree, which I will get in
about a year from now.  So, I am still not qualified as a "patent lawyer,"
but I have passed the patent bar exam and worked in the patent industry for
quite many years.  It is a pity that I have contributed zero line of code in
the open source repositories.  However, I have worked under the open source
environment to do various things for almost 20 years.

Now, a bit more about software patents.  To be clear, I am not and will not
advocate whether software patent, or patent as a whole, is good or bad for
the society.  I also would not conclude whether the patent system is screwed
up or not.  These are of your personal opinion or belief, and I would
respect it in any possible way.  What I was trying to do in another thread
is to tell you folks WHAT patents are, and HOW the patent system currently
works to the extent possible to protect the open source community.

I understand many of you may have very strong feelings against software
patents or maybe against the entire patent system.  Honestly, I am not
surprised.  But what I hope is that if you have a different opinion, please
focus on the point and not attack me or anyone personally.

I myself have once been convinced by RMS's agenda that the government should
abolish software patents entirely, and that all software patents should be
invalid.  But after these years as a patent professional, I found that RMS's
agenda has not done anything good for the open source community.  Software
patents are still there and will still be there for quite many years if not
decades.  Open source community must do something in parallel and not put
all eggs in the same basket.  Don't forget, people from the other side are
still accumulating their patent strength and are always ready to attack
whenever time matures.

In the real world, patents are often used as weapons against competing
businesses.  Everyone knows weapons are dangerous and may serve good and bad
purposes.  But it would be really really tough to eliminate weapons when
"bearing arm" is citizen's right protected by the US constitution.  Many of
you probably don't know that "patent protection," similar to everyone's
liberty and property interests, is guaranteed by the US Constitution.  No
need to explain, you would see how hard it is to persuade the Congress to
abolish the ENTIRE patent system.

Even if you want to carve out software patents, it would still be very
difficult.  The very first question is, where do we draw the line?  Namely,
what should be considered as software and what should not?  We know that if
you write some codes, it's software.  But if someone uses computer codes to
control the ABS system for automobiles in a fancifully new way, should that
be allowed or prohibited from seeking patent protection?  That would lead to
more contention and would make the already complicated patent system even
more chaotic.  Plus, it would create more jobs for lawyers, which you guys
probably don't want to see that happen.

Enough said, I have to acknowledge that I am a human being who makes
mistakes.  It's my mistake by stating Dr. King as ever being a lawyer.  But
if that single mistake could lead you to believe that all my other points
are bogus, then you are not listening.  For those of you who don't believe
in patent attorneys, I'd like to ask:  would you learn science with an
artist, learn art with a businessman, and learn business with a scientist?
I personally would rather learn science with a scientist, learn art with an
artist, and learn business with a businessman.  My two cents for your
consideration.

Hope to meet with you guys in any of the BLU meetings.

HYC
http://hsuanyeh.com



BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities.

Valid HTML 4.01! Valid CSS!



Boston Linux & Unix / webmaster@blu.org