More and more, I'm coming to the realization that software patents are a VERY bad thing. I recently discovered that one of my favorite utility apps for Windows was permanently suspended because it infringed on a software patent. The patent in question is located here.
The patent describes, in brief, a GUI element that allows for selecting and launching programs from a "drawer-like" toolbar. The first question I have concerns prior art. This patent was filed in late 2000. How is there not prior art? Microsoft had the Office toolbar going well before that (not to mention the Start menu or the quick launch toolbar). Both KDE and GNOME have had "drawer-like" GUI elements for some time.
The problem is just that software patents tend to be overly broad and it seems blatantly obvious that those reviewing the patent submissions typically are completely ignorant of the subject matter. This alone should be enough of an argument against software patents, not to mention the fact that software patents are basically patents on ideas and concepts. Can a musical artists patent a chord progression, or a type of composition? Of course not! Why then are software companies able to do the exact same thing; especially when most of the software patents tend to deal with something overly broad or blatantly obvious (such as "one-click shopping")? It seems that most companies nowadays like to earn their money through the legal system instead of producing quality software.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment