🚀 go-pugleaf

I have to disagree with your opinion that some patents are useful.
According to the U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8:

"The Congress shall have Power...

    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;"

So it's obvious that the framers had intended to promote industry in
the areas of science and art.  Many people go by the philosophy that
the less you have to do to achieve the desired result, the better.
With that in mind, I argue that there is no need for the government to
get involved with patents in the software industry.

The software industry has more than enough incentives already.  There
are many programs which contain no patents whatsoever and yet are big
money makers for the companies which distribute them.

There are many ways to protect an investment in software development
other than patents.  Shipping binary only software hinders attempts to
reverse engineer a product long enough to give the originator a market
lead.  The PC industry has done this for years.

Judging by the success of the software industry in the 60s, 70s and
80s, it doesn't appear that the lack of patents hindered the progress
of the industry.

In my opinion, the termination of all software patents would have very
little negative effect on the industry as a whole.  The worst effect
would be to deprive the law industry of many millions of dollars.  Oh,
and it might put a few patent writers out of business too.

Daniel Guilderson
ryan@cs.umb.edu