🚀 go-pugleaf

> That brings us to software patents...  Software patents act to encourage
> innovation by providing a temporary monopoly to the inventor of a unique
> idea.  This allows the inventor to profit from the idea while providing
> for the eventual release of the idea into the public domain.
>
> Software patents should not be banned.  I think most complaints about
> software patents come from all the crap that gets through the morons at
> the patent office.  The patent office needs serious work before software
> patents become truly worthwhile.


I think most people can agree that mathematical knowledge should not
be patentable. But:

* The means of performing a computation is mathematical knowledge.

* Any possible scope of a "software patent" is a means of performing a
computation. All computations that can be performed by a computer are
mathematical, whether or not you express them that way. Inside, the
computer is just pushing bits.

* Therefore software is mathematical knowledge.

* Therefore software patents ought not be permitted.

Currently the US Supreme Court has a dodgy distinction between
"mathematical" and "non-mathematical" algorithms for patent
purposes. I believe no such distinction is tenable. Furthermore, even
when it would not be possible to patent an algorithm itself, it is
possible to patent a broad category of applications thereof. Read the
RSA patent sometime, it is actually a patent on any communication
system using one or more computers connected in some way etc etc. I
don't think this distinction is tenable either. If the algorithm is
free, all use of it should be free.


 - Maciej Stachowiak

-- 
guile -c '(define c call-with-current-continuation)(define(f s)(lambda(o)(let
((n(c(lambda(x)(o x)x))))(let p((n n)(l(string->list s)))(cond((not (null? l)
)(display(car l))(p(c n)(cdr l))))))))((f"Js nte ul akr")(f"utAohrGieHce\n"))'