Hacker News Reader

Comment by jpdoctor | Hacker News Reader

> I think patents probably work better in certain areas than they do in ours. Software patents? No. Process patents? No. They just don't make sense.

Only if you ignore the fact that congress is composed of lawyers, who have a large self-interest in preserving the current Byzantine system.

View on HN

Top (when I wrote this) comment on this thread is, on close read, virtually content free.

Right, pointing out that conflict of interest means that software patent law is here to stay is content-free.

That was what I was saying, yes. I don't intend offense.

How many patent lawyers are there in Congress? I'd be surprised if it's more than one or two.

I do not think a lawyer have to specialize in patents specifically to support byzantine laws. I think it is the willingness and propensity to accept laws and regulations for everything.

Have you ever talked to an IP lawyer? It is surprisingly difficult to become one. You responded to an interesting point with more superficial innuendo about congress.

> How many patent lawyers are there in Congress?

How did you get "patent lawyers" from my statement of "lawyers"?

It doesn't take much to recognize that folks in the legal profession are going to be pro-legal structure.

If Congress wanted software patents to be legal, Congress would have made them legal in 1972 or 1973. They wouldn't have waited around for the Federal Circuit court to contradict previous Supreme Court opinions.

Why would a non-patent lawyer have any interest in preserving the "current Byzantine system"?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com