[Discuss] Self-introduction and more on software patent

[bogstad at pobox.com (Bill Bogstad)]

On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Hsuan-Yeh Chang <hsuanyeh at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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'm glad you decided to stay.

> 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 look forward to hearing more about how to do this.  In one of your
previous notes, I believe you mentioned something about filing a
preliminary application as an inexpensive option to protect oneself.
I'm not sure if that will be sufficient to deal with RMS' argument
that any program of consequence might have 100s of patentable ideas,
but it might be a start.   I also question how much this would help if
the applications were not written with the (expensive?) help of
experts in the patent field.   Still I would like to hear more on how
this could be made to work.

>...
> 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.

Actually I did know this.   The single line in question from the US
Constitution:

"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for
limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their
respective Writings and Discoveries;"

mentions neither patents nor copyrights by name.   Nor does it require
the federal government to create such laws unless they deem them
useful.  That's not to say that I think these laws are going away, but
I think you overstate your case by suggesting patents and copyrights
are in the same category as other rights to liberty and property as
guaranteed in the US Constitution and it's amendments.   I see no bar
in the Constitution for Congress to up and decide it's all worthless
and eliminate them entirely.   I have read some things that imply that
ratified treaties are considered to be somewhere between legislation
and the Constitution as far as US law is concerned.  If true, current
treaties could be an issue for any attempt to eliminate patents.   If
you could clarify/correct me on that, it would be appreciated.

> 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.

I look forward to hearing more from you and others who can help me to
learn about this and other subjects.  That doesn't mean that I won't
question your assumptions or analysis.  Being human as well, I have a
tendency to accept arguments that confirm my preconceptions with less
thought and perhaps over-analyze those that don't.   In the end
though, I hope that I'm able to accept well-reasoned conclusions even
if I don't like the results.

Bill Bogstad