28 pointsby theanonymousone9 hours ago1 comment
  • unfitted25457 hours ago
    Are patents a necessary evil?
    • dlcarrier5 hours ago
      I used to think they were entirely useless, but since then I've learned of many instances where a much better technology is developed because the first iteration is patented.

      For example, the Wright brothers biggest contribution to aviation was suing everyone using wing warping (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_brothers_patent_war) which greatly advanced the adoption of the much more advanced ailerons.

      Software patents have a similar effect, for example Cisco's patent on Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol led to the development of the more secure and more capable Common Address Redundancy Protocol (https://jacobfilipp.com/DrDobbs/articles/SA/v14/i05/a6.htm).

      We tend to invest heavily in whatever we can get working first, but it's rarely close to an ideal way of doing something. By pushing every developer to find a newer, better way of doing something, patents prevent stagnation and lead to more advanced technologies.

      • cogman104 hours ago
        This sort of benefit in software can be realized with much shorter terms. A 5 or 10 year term would accomplish pretty much all the same benefits. 25 years is just way too long for software.
        • dlcarrier35 minutes ago
          The benefit comes from no one ever using the earlier inferior versions.
          • cogman1027 minutes ago
            Correct. 5 years is long enough to kill off inferior standards and let superior ones blossom.
    • ThrowawayTestr5 hours ago
      Software patents, no. They're just evil.