Re: You have rights.. Software Patents are I llegal

Hibbs, Phil wrote:
> >Yes I know that when I write code I can make mistakes 
> >(e.g. a syntax error) but it doesn't mean I don't know 
> >what the instruction is going to do when stated correctly.
> 
> A program is more than just a sequence of deterministic statements. 

And a book is more than a sequence of letters.  Aren't we going around
in circles here?  If software should be patented, then so should
literature, because through extensive design and testing, the author
has found the sequence of letters that achieves the desired effect on
the person reading the book.  (I can think of about 10 techniques in
fiction I could patent right away, and I'm not even an author.)

Given that both points of view can be argued forever, perhaps it would
be best to stick with the argument that could potentially lead towards
the desired end result, i.e. the argument that might lead to stopping
these software patents before it is too late.  (This *is* the desired
end result from all of our points of view here, isn't it?)

Some people out there will refuse to be persuaded, but others will
take on these ideas.  Perhaps it is best to concentrate on those who
might be open to these ideas, but who have not yet been totally
convinced one way or the other?

Jim

-- 
 Jim Peters                  (_)/=\~/_(_)                 [email protected]
                          (_)  /=\  ~/_  (_)
 Uazú                  (_)    /=\    ~/_    (_)                http://
 Brighton, UK       (_) ____ /=\ ____ ~/_ ____ (_)            uazu.net

 OpenEEG -- EEG for the rest of us!   For details:  http://uazu.net/OE