On Saturday 06 December 2003 02:02, Ian Clarke wrote:
Yes but but even implying it's an innovative business idea is a no-no when
you
bring business model patents into the picture. I can't remember if they're also included in the current fight.
Wait a minute, what are you trying to argue? I am saying that innovators (whether business innovators or technology innovators) are adversely affected by patents. You seem to be going off on a tangent about how someone inventing a video library website isn't an innovation. True or false, it is totally beside the point.
I'm just pointing out (and as I said it's not a very big point) that one of the problems with the patent system as it has applied to software has been the abysmally low standard for what is innovative. We anti-swpat folk mention this a lot and will probably be pointing out just how uninnovative most of the patents effecting our video store owner are. The problem is that some of them could be considered (especially from a non-techie background) marginally more innovative than simply flogging videos over the net. Calling a web video store an "innovation" implies that some of these or some of the other appalling business method patents which take an everyday physical business and webbify it actually are innovations and we wouldn't want to do that.
Playing Devil's advocate, established companies are already doing plenty of business on the net, even in countries which enforce software patents, like the US.
They are but how many of them have quietly settled with bullshit patent companies rather than fight? I have no idea and it'll never be public but I'd say the answer is a resounding "some". Then there's the quite public case of Microsoft and Eolas, there's also the "you could be next" campaign, can't find the site right now but it's a perfect example of small businesses getting the shaft on a nonsense patent. So it's a useful angle with plenty of real live this is happening right now material to work with. Just emphasise that in 10 yers time the web will be awash with "you could be next" companies and that each 1 of the patents on that diagram could be used in this way,
F