13
Jan

Lessons Forgot : patent policy circa 1882

   Posted by: dhcsoul   in Odds & Sods

Your first time here? Welcome, I'm glad you've dropped in.... David Soul (aka Bricoleur)

Since
I resurrected this weblog I’ve been asked several times if there is any
rhyme or reason for the eclectic set of topics….

…well … yes!

Each section stands on its own but is related to the future of Complex Event Processing
in some way or another!  In future posts, I’ll expound on these
relations and give some insights on how I hope the future will
unfold… in the meantime I thought I’d resurrect some of my earliest
posts (now almost a year old) on the raison de etre for each individual
topic group in this blog….

On Patents ….

Many who believe the system of software patents is fatally flawed
still encourage companies to file for them as “that’s just the way
things are now”.  But that just isn’t good enough… if the system is
flawed it must be (eventually) corrected or it will destroy that which
it was set up to preserve.

…..

The US Supreme court knew this when it first applied corrective
influence to a process that was out of control…. in 1882…. shame
that the lessons of the past have been forgotten by the current PTO
with respect to prior art and obvious concepts in the case of software
patents !

“It was never the object of patent laws to grant
a monopoly for every trifling device, every shadow of a shade of an
idea, which would naturally and spontaneously occur to any skilled
mechanic or operator in the ordinary progress of manufactures.

Such an indiscriminate creation of exclusive
privileges tends rather to obstruct than to stimulate invention. It
creates a class of speculative schemers who make it their business to
watch the advancing wave of improvement, and gather its foam in the
form of patented monopolies, which enable them to lay a heavy tax on
the industry of the country, without contributing anything to the real
advancement of the arts.

It embarrasses the honest pursuit of business
with fears and apprehensions of unknown liability lawsuits and
vexatious accounting for profits made in good faith.”

–U.S. Supreme Court, Atlantic Works vs. Brady, 1882

For the full story, follow the link:- goto

originally Posted to cep.weblogger.com by David Soul on 12/30/04; 11:00:07 PM
in the IP section.


permalink#

Related posts on Bricoleur Systems -auto generated:

  1. Petition Against Software Patent To:  The United States Government We, the undersigned, are voters involved in the IT industry who believe that software patents...
  2. Petition Against Software Patent To:  The United States Government We, the undersigned, are voters involved in the IT industry who believe that software patents...
  3. FAQ about the Viable Blog Frequently Asked Questions Who are you ? I’m David HC Soul … and for those of you old enough to ...
  4. Lessons Forgot 40+ years ago the cyberneticist Stafford Beer forecast that computerization would be a disaster if this “new” prescription of Shirky’s...
  5. Patents 2.0 IEEE Spectrum: Patents 2.0 Writing in Spectrum online,  Lee Hollaar sugests “…. scrapping software patents altogether is not the solution....

Tags: CEP, Complex Event Processing, intellectual property

This entry was posted on Friday, January 13th, 2006 at 3:41 am and is filed under Odds & Sods. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Comments are closed at this time.