Yes, this is a dupe from earlier today. I posted the damned thing by accident while learning the system in a half awake stupor. And, because I was in an half awake stupor, decided it was a good idea to share it with the world after accidentally posting it. I've been trying to get them to take it down to no avail. Failing that I've suggested better language and asked other people to suggest better language. On Monday I plan to call the White House switch board and see if I can beg/bully my way to someone with the power to update the text. The previous thread had my suggestion for better language, but I'll just go ahead and repost it here:
----
The US Patent system is badly broken with respect to software patents. Patents are being issued to companies for “inventions” that are, in fact, common knowledge included in any introductory software textbook. The result is that the large software corporations are buying up reams of patents and using them to bully small, innovative companies out of business or into paying ridiculous licensing fees.
Quite apart from encouraging innovation, patents are now stifling it.
The software industry is one of the few industries still strong in America. Even in a time of recession, there are not enough computer programmers to fill all the available positions. Startup companies are forming and growing readily. But if every line of code written brings with it a potential violation of someone else's intellectual property, this will cease to be the case.
To solve this problem, we petition the Obama Administration to direct the Patent office to cease issuing software patents and to instruct the judicial system to take a long hard look at existing patents for validity. With these two steps, those of us in the software industry can stop worrying about mutually assured patent destruction and get back to doing what we do best.
----
If anyone else comes up with language the community prefers, I'm game to use it when I call the switchboard on Monday.
It basically says the same thing. Just with out the grammatical mess. Most of the signatures of come from either here or reddit and I've posted the suggested update text in both places to similar reactions.
I understand, but, still, the language in the first paragraph is contradictory. "The patent office's original interpretation of software as language and therefor patentable" states the original interpretation of the USPTO is that language is patentable. A petition like this should not allow the slightest amount of confusion.
This would be one of the reasons why the language needs to be fixed. I don't think there was any doubt in the minds of those who signed what it was asking. And the new language just removes my messy "let's-just-throw-text-in-this-textbox" crap.
Indeed, but people already signed the petition. I understand most probably nobody who signed it understood your intentions, but, still, it's now a signed document.
Hi, I'm a reporter for the Wall Street Journal and I'm very interested in talking to you about this. Can you email me?
Best,
Laura Meckler
laura.meckler@wsj.com
----
The US Patent system is badly broken with respect to software patents. Patents are being issued to companies for “inventions” that are, in fact, common knowledge included in any introductory software textbook. The result is that the large software corporations are buying up reams of patents and using them to bully small, innovative companies out of business or into paying ridiculous licensing fees.
Quite apart from encouraging innovation, patents are now stifling it. The software industry is one of the few industries still strong in America. Even in a time of recession, there are not enough computer programmers to fill all the available positions. Startup companies are forming and growing readily. But if every line of code written brings with it a potential violation of someone else's intellectual property, this will cease to be the case.
To solve this problem, we petition the Obama Administration to direct the Patent office to cease issuing software patents and to instruct the judicial system to take a long hard look at existing patents for validity. With these two steps, those of us in the software industry can stop worrying about mutually assured patent destruction and get back to doing what we do best.
----
If anyone else comes up with language the community prefers, I'm game to use it when I call the switchboard on Monday.