Re: Software Patents

[rjack]

Lee Hollaar wrote:
> In article <epWdnQrtSMWJyejbnZ2dnUVZ_rCsnZ2d@insightbb.com> rjack <rjack@com> 
> writes:
> > Twenty-nine years later Congress is still sitting on its collective ass 
> > while the rest of the World moves on.
>
> Perhaps Congress hasn't acted on software patents because it is not
> unhappy with the state of the law.

Perhaps. . .

Article I of the Constitution was drafted to establish the *legislative* 
powers of the Federal government -- it is directed at Congress and not 
the Judiciary.

Art I sec. 8 cl. 8:

"Section 8. The Congress shall have power. . .

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for 
limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their 
respective writings and discoveries;"

The job of the judiciary is to define the *boundries* of Congress's 
powers established by the clause -- not to enumerate the *specifics* of 
implementation. The clause is one of the most specific in Article I
directed at the legislative branch.

Because Congress is *happy* with a vague and inchoate law is no excuse 
for incompetence. We have thirteen appellate circuits going in different 
directions concerning the copyright/patent protection provided for 
software. The Federal Circuit changes its mind every few months. The 
trial lawyers love this situation, businesses -- especially small 
businesses -- are intimidated and bled. IBM, Microsoft, and a few well 
heeled, lawyered-up corporations bully the rest of the business world.

Perhaps you are happy with Congress being happy with the state of the 
law. I'm not. I still believe the Congress should work for the people 
and not the other way around.

Intellectual property has a valuable place in a capitalist economy.
The citizens through their representatives should define the specifics 
of the role IP plays in that economy -- not a handful of lifetime 
appointed lawyers in black robes.

rjack