Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Software Patent Idiot

Comments Filter:
  • Article: []

    Dear Michael Q. Lee,

    I feel that your article ignores the cost side of the cost-benefit analysis as applies to software patents. Incentives are important, but then so is the ability to code in the first place. The nature of software is that it is rich in ideas, and accordingly, one find that a given piece of software, naïvely coded, is quite likely to transgress such a patent. This, not time to code, is the real reason that patents on softw
    • I realised that Micheal Lee is an atourney when I got to the bottom of the article, and as such, he might not be arguing entirely in good faith (lawyers are paid to promote their clients' interests, not to seek the truth), so I have written a letter to the editor.
      Micheal Lee is mistaken. I have written to him a long response, but I pass on to you the sailent points:

      His analysis looks at the benefits of software patents, but not the costs. Incentives are not enough: it must be possible to produce the

To communicate is the beginning of understanding. -- AT&T