Apreche's Journal: Software Patent Idiot

An article sayign software patents are good.

Everyone e-mail this idiot to shut him up. He's got the same old economist arguments that ignore the fundamental differences of software. He actually seems like a reasonable intelligent person, so enough intelligent e-mail might actually turn him over.

Letter to the Author

[Morosoph]

Article: http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/41921.html [linuxinsider.com]

Dear Michael Q. Lee,

I feel that your article ignores the cost side of the cost-benefit analysis as applies to software patents. Incentives are important, but then so is the ability to code in the first place. The nature of software is that it is rich in ideas, and accordingly, one find that a given piece of software, naïvely coded, is quite likely to transgress such a patent. This, not time to code, is the real reason that patents on softw

Letter to the Editor

[Morosoph]

I realised that Micheal Lee is an atourney when I got to the bottom of the article, and as such, he might not be arguing entirely in good faith (lawyers are paid to promote their clients' interests, not to seek the truth), so I have written a letter to the editor.
----
Micheal Lee is mistaken. I have written to him a long response, but I pass on to you the sailent points:

His analysis looks at the benefits of software patents, but not the costs. Incentives are not enough: it must be possible to produce the