🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <10565@scolex.sco.COM> seanf@sco.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) writes:
>
>In article <870@nddsun1.sps.mot.com> waters@nddsun1.sps.mot.com (Mike Waters) writes:
>>If you sell the code then you take your chances just like any other
>>business. If you give it away without charge there is no profit in
>>suing you is there?
>
>Yes, there is.  If, for example, IBM decided that GCC used something that
>they had patented, then IBM could get an injunction forbidding the FSF (and
>Cygnus, for that matter) from distributing GCC.

Why has this never happened in the Ham Radio arena where sharing of
designs is very common, despite circuit patents?

Do you have any real examples of this or is this just a paper tiger.

>>Why? Why hasn't this happened in fields like instant cameras (Land vs
>>Kodak), electronics etc.?

>Jesus.  Are you really that stupid?

Ad Hominem attacks are hardly relevant.

>Guess what:  I can start up a software company for about $5k.  

About what Land used to start Polaroid.

>On the other
>hand, starting up an electronics or camera company would take at least an
>order of magnitude more.  

Look in ANY issue of QST (ham Radio magazine). I can think of at least a
dozen "one man shows" who make specialized electronics parts for that
market. Even a custom IC (the Curtis Keyer) which has been marketed by
the inventor/designer for at least 10 years.

>A 13-year old can write commercially successful
>software, yet that same 13-year old is not likely to be able to design and
>manufacture an instant camera.

A sad commentary on the skill level you feel is needed for software. If
indeed the quality is still that low then it doesn't deserve protecting
IMHO.

>>Please explain just what makes software so uniquely vulnerable? More so
>>than say circuit design which has always had patents, innovation and
>>small companies.
>
>"small" companies, if you please.  Very few electronics startup companies
>had less than $100k to start off with, and, yes, quite a bit of that went to
>patent searches.

See above. I have already described how to do a patent search for under
$10, and most of that (here at least) is for parking fees!

>Now, maybe you don't think we (as a nation) should promote software design.

As you seem to define it above, "software design" seems about as worthy
of protection as the grafitti on a wall.

>Fine.  I guess you also don't mind the fact that this will be the last area
>in which we are likely to gain ground on forein competitors? 

Please explain why foreign 13 year olds are not as smart as ours?

> I guess you
>also don't mind the fact that the industry would largely disappear?

You repeat that assertion over and over, but never explain how it will
happen. You also fail to explain why Ham Radio (and a dozen similar
hobbies) continue to thrive despite being in fields that allow patents.

Doesn't make a lot of sense, but I certainly see a lot of hysteria!