• bitwise@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Copyright won’t help here. Extending it to allow the protection of concepts as well as literal implementation is what Oracle tried to do, and would’ve resulted in a few megacorps demanding licensing for core concepts that no one can really make quality, functional software without.

    Of course, software patents are also stupid, even if the general intent of patents seems reasonable.

    • BoofStroke@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Patents should simply be a monopoly on an idea for enough time to gather resources to develop that idea’s prototype. I know it doesn’t work that way, but it should. They really should be there for small inventors, not giant corps who have plenty of resources, but I digress.

      But software itself can implement that prototype without having to build anything. Your ideas can be created directly. We don’t patent math and we don’t patent poetry or even poetic writing structures.

      Software and business method patents are utter bullshit.

      • andruid@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Honestly I feel like parents should be limited to companies based on size. Like at least fortune 500 should get extra legal protection, but maybe even straight limited to less than 200 employees and less than a certain capital evaluation (harder one to pin point).