Why Software Patents Do Not Make Sense

[TechieFromOverThere]

To me, software patents just don't make much sense. Perhaps it's because I've worked in a lot of different fields on both sides of the fence--so to speak. Or, perhaps it's because of my inherent fondness of writing. In either case, we must accept what has already been agreed upon by a very large majority and expand upon that reality.

So, let's ask ourselves to define software by asking simple questions. How? How? How? How do we conceive software? How do we think of it? How do we speak of it? How do we create it? How do we manufacture it? How do we do the same with like material?

Well, first of all, software is based on programming languages. Before anyone even begins typing, everyone first goes through the routine of noting which programming languages they are familiar with. There is no sense on working on a project if you have not learned the required language.

Then when we write software, we do so by making logical statements or comparisons. Don't forget to avoid those reserved words, as appropriate, and properly employ language elements. Generally, the process involves drafting code and revising code and then finally implementing the code.

Once we are done writing the software, we either publish the code ourselves or, especially if we've written a game title, we seek a publisher to distribute our software to electronic or physical shelf space. Meanwhile, attorneys or the most suitable individuals make copies of the software code and submit the printed pages for copyright registration just like any other written work.

Now imagine if you could not only copyright a book but patent the book too. Suppose someone was first--someone is always first--to create a page with minimal text. You've seen pages like this between chapters, right? What about the first to create an index at the end or a table of contents that allows someone to quickly jump to parts of this knowledge-based "intellectual" property.

Doing so would create seriously negative effects. It would largely impede language communication and development. Or, in other words, it would curtail the growth and sharing of thought. Sometimes, the mere expression is currently forbidden and the bloom of a rose wilts away.

I have no problem with someone copyrighting a particular phrase or organization of facts. I have done it myself. There is also a place for proper trademarks. Granted, that is another topic. However, on the subject of software patents, why should anyone be so paranoid and greedy in a land supposedly based on the tenants of sharing and freedom and a purportedly "free economy" that is allowed to grow from the tiny sparks of thought in our heads out to the environment and ultimately to the people?

Isn't an active environment fertilized with ideas and blooming success more valuable to us as a society than a single hog who purposefully strips the earth of its resources and bans others from planting flowers just because they thought of writing about the life cycle of flowers first?

Everyone should have the opportunity to harvest--and develop--a rich environment. This is what makes a good community. This place is our home and, yet, this is what we have made of it: A chained madness. Anyone who stands for what this country truly represents should be ashamed of these absurd software patents and break the chains that should not exist whether in the past, present or future.

[Lord Ba'al]

How very true. Software patents just stifle innovation :x