Re: [LUG] If this wasn't so dangerous, you'd laugh.

[Henry Bremridge <debian@xxxxxxxxx>]

Been reading Neil's last email before work.

There was an article in The Economist recently which (from what I 
recall) said that the reason for a patent was to give the developer a 
monopoly as a reward for time consuming and risky behaviour AND as a 
reward for development.

Once someone comes up with a workable idea: antibiotics, airplanes. Then 
I agree they need a monopoly to allow them to develop their idea and 
obtain the rewards. (Lets face it, a drug is "software" for combatting a 
disease: but one which cost about $1bn to develop and launch on to the 
market.)

At the other extreme I find it hard to justify a patent for 21(?) years 
for basic common sense (eg one click shopping on Amazon), and which it 
took about a day to obtain corporate approval, code, test and release.

I would have thought therefore that the answer is that with some 
patents, the barrier to the grant of the patent was made considerably higher

--
The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the
message body to unsubscribe.