mch@ukc.ac.uk (Martin Howe) (04/24/89)
In article <233@imspw6.UUCP> bob@imspw6.UUCP (Bob Burch) writes: > >From Ted Holden, HTE > [] >out what I see as the central question involved here: "How can we frame >a law or system of laws which would simultaneously guarantee individual >artists the rights to their own creations, companies the rights to their >ligitimate developments, but prevent behemoths such as Apple Corp. from >attempting to lay claim to air, earth, fire, water, and innumerable things >which are basically computer software equivalents of ideas like controlling >a four-wheeled vehicle via a wheel in front of the driver, and forcing us >all to pay tribute for using any of the above?" Part of the problem is deciding what is an original idea and what is not. There is a story that Bell beat Edison to the Patent Office by 15 minutes with his telephone design. Even if this is only apocryphal, it could easily have happened. Edison might well have made a working version BEFORE Bell did but lived further away from the patent office. I'm sure that there are other second order effects that can mar the "first to the patent office" idea. Right now, though, it's the only one we've got. I thought up the idea of branch target cacheing as an undergrad in computer systems three years ago, then read that AMD had already patented the idea. The telephone was such a step forward enough and isolated enough that I don't feel *too* bad about Edison. However NO ONE should have intellectual property rights to something like branch target caching or trash cans as just about EVERYONE was bound to think of it within a few years, or already had. This sort of thing is normally decided by judges, but they are usually laymen w.r.t. computer science and anyway, "the law is an ass" (no, I don't know who said that :-). I'd like to think that Congress and Parliament could formulate a suitable set of guidelines in their respective counrties, but I can't see it happening. Any remarks... ? -- Martin Howe (This posting is private, and NOT on behalf of UKC)
jeffd@ficc.uu.net (jeff daiell) (04/25/89)
In article <740@harrier.ukc.ac.uk>, mch@ukc.ac.uk (Martin Howe) writes: > > > I thought up the idea of branch target cacheing ... > then read that AMD had already patented the idea. > .... NO ONE should have intellectual property > rights to something like branch target caching or trash cans as just about > EVERYONE was bound to think of it within a few years, or already had. > > This sort of thing is normally decided by judges, but they are usually laymen > w.r.t. computer science and anyway, "the law is an ass" (no, I don't know > who said that :-). > > I'd like to think that Congress and Parliament could formulate a suitable > set of guidelines ... but I can't see it happening. > I believe it was one of the Johnsons - Ben or Sam, that is, not Andrew or Lyndon - who made the remark. It may not be easy to protect the Human right to intellectual property, but I would argue that, ethically and practically, it's certainly worth the effort. Second, even if politicians can't come up with an acceptable "set of guidelines" (heh heh -- should we send these postings about copyrights to Joe Biden?), perhaps a private group (or groups) could. Para un Tejas Libre, Jeff Daiell -- "The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those who, in times of moral crisis, preserved their neutrality." -- Dante
wcs) (04/26/89)
In article <740@harrier.ukc.ac.uk> mch@ukc.ac.uk (Martin Howe) writes: } Part of the problem is deciding what is an original idea and what is not. There Yup. } is a story that Bell beat Edison to the Patent Office by 15 minutes with his } telephone design. Even if this is only apocryphal, it could easily have The competitor was actually named Gray; it wasn't Edison. On the other hand, there was this undertaker named Strowger who invented the dial telephone because he thought one of his competitors was bribing the phone company operators to direct business his way. He offered to license it to Bell Telephone, but they wouldn't buy it, so he licensed it to someone else (?General Telephone?) After all, who'd want to dial a phone instead of asking an operator who knew where the person you wanted to call really was and gave you good personal service? We paid licensing fees to them for *years* after that! } This sort of thing is normally decided by judges, but they are usually laymen } w.r.t. computer science and anyway, "the law is an ass" (no, I don't know } who said that :-). It was Mr. Micawber, a Dickens character. He may have been fictitious, but he sure was correct. -- # Bill Stewart, AT&T Bell Labs 2G218 Holmdel NJ 201-949-0705 ho95c.att.com!wcs # also found at 201-271-4712 tarpon.att.com!wcs
mslater@cup.portal.com (Michael Z Slater) (04/30/89)
It is my feeling that far too many patents are allowed today. The vast majority of patents are for ideas that many people have had, or will soon have; because of external events, there is a time when certain ideas are likely to arise in many places. I believe that it is counterproductive to grant monopolies to whoever manages to patent such an idea first. I think that the standard for patentability needs to be dramatically raised. Only major, fundamentally new concepts should be eligible. The problem, of course, is who decid, and how. Michael Slater, Microprocessor Report mslater@cup.portal.com