On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 10:29:04AM -0400, Michael Hammer wrote:
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 07:22:51 -0700, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
<pbaker(_at_)verisign(_dot_)com> wrote:
Software patents are OK in principle, its just that if the rules were
applied properly the number issued each year would be less than ten.
RSA was a reasonable application, I did not like it but it was reasonable.
LZW is another good example. The fact that Unisys went the submarine
patent route is another issue.
I think we probably have a lot more chance of achieving something if we
go for reform rather than wholesale abandonment of software patents.
As Phillip said, applying the rules correctly would be a great help.
Secondly, I think that we could certainly make a strong case for reduction
in the term of software patents; technology moves on far faster than
traditional fields, and the effect of a 17-year term is therefore far more
stifling than it would be in traditional fields. What do we think that the
longest term that could be granted without harming innovation etc. would
be? 1 year? 3 years? Certainly no more than that, IMHO.
I guess we have to make the point that the patent system is not achieving
its goals in the field of software at present, ask for a thorough review,
and make suggestions as to how it could be fixed.
Cheers,
Nick