pieterh 1179826709|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
Does the FFII see any possibility of agreeing to a compromise with software patent supporters?
This is like asking whether Galileo could compromise with the Catholic church, or whether global warming can be fixed by compromise. Software patents are not a science, they are a religion, based on the myth that a patent office can magically create value out of thin air. Value is created by hard work, not by legal magic. The FFII has been pointing to truth, not opinion. Truth is not a negotiable thing, it just exists.
Will the patent industry one day stop selling worthless certificates which only do damage to the economy? Yes, either because groups like ours educate enough people to see what is going on, or because the economy will pretty rapidly find itself unable to continue paying this huge tax on innovation.
Understand that while copyright and trademark are legal protection for existing investments, patents pretend to create totally new value. Now ask yourself, where does this value really come from? Either it's taken by force from the market, by raising costs, or the value is not there at all, and the patent as a "valuable object" is a lie, perhaps even a financial and tax fraud.
Do you see why any discussion of "compromise" is misplaced? This is not a fight between opposing ideologies. It's a fight between reality and delusion, between industry and lawyers, between society at large, and special interests.
Mostly, the delusion has been created on purpose by patent experts who make huge amounts of money from it. Politicians have swallowed the myth that "patents are valuable" without looking closely, mainly because they know very little about science, economics, or business. To me, as a businessman and scientist, it's not even a subtle delusion, it's absolutely flagrant. But people throughout history have been convinced by big lies - all the 'isms' of the last century.
Many companies (allegedly e.g. Apple) declare, that they are against patents, but still they collect patents for so called "defensive" reasons.
It's just an arms race. Defensive guns and knives don't make the place safer. Small firms can't afford patent portfolios, and large ones that try to use them still get sued by patent trolls. Patent portfolios only make the lawyers richer and more powerful, and help continue the problem. In the US, where patents are cheap and easy, an incredible 80% of startups in the IT sector do not file a single software patent within 4 years of receiving VC funding. Normal entrepreneurs and engineers do *not want* patents, it's lawyers that want them.
pieterh, 1179826709|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover