On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Wakko Warner wrote:
> I'd like to know what Philip's stance is on this. I'm not sure if this
> effects me at all (I'm in the USA), but I certainly don't want to see a
> great MTA get shot down due to stupid patents.
I am against patenting ideas and algorithms. Science advances because
people publish their ideas, and others build on them. Look how slow
progress was, and how much duplication took place, in the centuries when
publication was difficult. I am also against patenting human interface
characteristics. It's a good thing nobody patented a steering wheel, or
a mouse for that matter.
However, I am a technician, and have no political skills. I have to
leave it to others to fight political battles.
In the early days of any new technology, everybody studies what
everybody else is doing, copies what they can, and tries to improve on
it. Somebody built the first car - lots of people followed (patent for
vehicle with 4 wheels, anybody?). One car maker invented the flashing
light for turning indicators - within a few years, they were all doing
it. There are plenty of similar examples.
When a technology gets to be more mainstream, people and companies start
to get greedy, and the lawyers move in. This seems to be what is
happening to software at the moment.
I am glad that there are not too many years left before I retire.
--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@??? Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.
Get the Exim 4 book: http://www.uit.co.uk/exim-book
