Free?

[Chante]

"Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:op.v3yn2di8eav7ka at localhost.localdomain...
> On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 17:37:02 -0400, Kagamin <spam at here.lot> wrote:
>
>> Steven Schveighoffer Wrote:
>>
>>> 1. Software is already well-covered by copyright.
>>
>> You can't write software out of thin air. Let's suppose ranges 
>> increase  usability of a collections library. Can you write a 
>> collections library  without knowing about ranges concept? That's what 
>> patents are for.
>
> patents exist to give an *incentive* to give away trade secrets that 
> would  otherwise die with the inventor.

That last part is, of course, a fallacy. It implies that the trade 
secrets would not be carried forward beyond the inventor's life by 
companies, progeny or some other means.

>The idea is, if you patent something,  you enjoy a period of monopoly, 
>where you can profit from the fruits of  your invention.

The defined period though may or may not be enough to recover the costs 
of invention. Who's to put a price on someone's work of invention which 
cost him pretty much all of his adult life? The patent office? I think 
not! And while some may not like that another's goals may be to "milk the 
invention for all it's worth for as long as possible", that's just "tough 
titties". Others may desire that scenario to give some "power" to those 
who can do good with it rather than build war machines and make war.

> In return, you bestow upon the world the secret behind  your idea.

That is only one possible scenario, perhaps "the moral high ground" 
perspective, but not even so, as shown above. It looks more (to me) like 
someone wanting to "get something for nothing". Instead of playing people 
like lottery tickets, those types should... buy lottery tickets|

> This allows people to build on your idea in the future, instead of 
> nobody ever being able to discover what your invention was.


The people in the company surrounding the product don't do that? Isn't 
software like children? An inventor may indeed have goals and purposes 
envisioned for his inventions. Why bother bringing babies home from the 
hospital? Just leave them there for whatever, right? Why not make all 
things a giant cesspool of cluster-fucking? Everything, all of the time, 
100% entitlement. (As the corporate middle managers yell in unison, "Yeah 
man, that!").

Now, about those proprietary "rights" you think you have to your 
children... are you sure someone else hasn't filed a patent for them 
before you?