Patent stupidity

I have not kept any track of the patent absurdities, but this Ars Technica article is an interesting update for me.

Quote: “This legal theory, known as the “technical effects doctrine,” holds that software that improves the functioning of a computer should be eligible for a patent. A version of this rule has long held sway in Europe, but it has only recently started to have an impact in US law.”

If this in practice is the case in Europe, it means any working piece of code, however small, is patentable? Except maybe ill-intended code, as that might not “improve”. Furthermore, badly written code might not be covered either? Is a mountain of spaghetti code beyond patent trolls? Mwahahaha.

If I play a 3D heavy game and it fries my graphics card, it certainly not improves my computer. Windows… that can’t be patentable? I mean.. doh. :p

Software patents are texts. One could say code for human brains to read and process. If they make the functioning of human minds worse, would it not be just des/s/ert to abolish them altogether?

Maybe there is something wrong with me, but then I would not be the only one.

Leave a Reply

Your e-mail address will not be published. Required fields are marked *