Mailing List Archive


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [tlug] Nice reply by Torvalds



On Wed, 16 May 2007, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

You *can't* get rid of the FUD factor, with patent law as it currently
exists.  And if you could, patents would be a shoo-in, and we'd never
get rid of them.

I don't quite understand that. Why would patents be a 'sho-in' if there were far more clarity about whether any particular thing one implemented violated a patent or not (if that's what you're saying here)?

The point is that the only hope for getting Congress (and other
legislatures; eg, I don't think Europe is anywhere near as safe as
Godwin seems to) to do something about them is to show that the
transactions costs (mostly search costs) way outweigh the benefits to
the innnovations.

If I understand what you're saying here, I don't think I buy this. The search costs are minimal; there are plenty of patent holders out there who are happy to tell you if you're violating their patent. And this of course produces defendents who are quite happy to do a fair amount of work to find prior art and so on.

Curt Sampson writes:

> (The first reason would be the hope that they actually could kill
> free software on patent issues, which I think is probably not
> likely, but would be a true disaster if they managed it.)

Now that might be enough to get Congress to do something about it.

I quite disagree. If free software died, I very much doubt that anybody with any political power would care, at least in the current social climate. I could go into the details about this, but I don't feel quite up to it right now, and it might get a bit boring, anyway.

cjs
--
Curt Sampson       <cjs@example.com>        +81 90 7737 2974

Mobile sites and software consulting: http://www.starling-software.com


Home | Main Index | Thread Index

Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links