Free?

[Chante]

Russel Winder wrote:

""we" here in the UK do not allow patents on software."

Good info. I would seem, then, that establishing a software company's 
home base in the UK is a better proposition that establishing one in the 
USA. Maybe. There's still the issue that a large amount of innovation is 
readily apparent upon release of a new software that copycats, especially 
ones with more funds and/or manpower, can cannibalize the inventor's 
work. And if one is locked-out of the USA market with the software, the 
UK might be worse than the USA for a software company.

Can software developed in the UK be sold in the USA if it renders 
something patented in the USA?

"It is currently explicitly stated as not
being patentable in its own right.  Software within machines can be
covered by a patent for the machines, but software cannot be patented on
its own."

So are companies taking advantage of that "loophole"? Does the machine 
have to be novel in a way other than by the novelty that its software 
affords it?

"Tere is no conspiracy here, it is just the big corporates making sure
the tools of creating monopolies and ensuring only they are in control
of innovation are used to best legal effect.  Of course it means anyone
who writes software has to know about every software patent worldwide so
as to ensure they do not violate.

In case people didn't know: lack of knowledge of a patent is not a
defence.  Patents apply to you even if you didn't know about the
patent."

The "unrecognition" or "blinding of one's eyes to" the fact that many, 
many inventions can and are independently developed, is troublesome, for 
sure. I wasn't going to bring up "crime against humanity" for this post, 
but then I read that last thing you wrote.