Quality. Independence. Impact.

Home | Contact Us | Media Resources

Thursday December 4, 2008

Welcome   |   Register   |   Log in

Past Event

An Economic Studies and Center on Social and Economic Dynamics Event

Software and Law: Is Regulation Fostering or Inhibiting Innovation?

Technology, Information Technology, Internet Policy, Business


Event Summary

In the last few decades, computers have gone from a relative novelty to an essential element of virtually every aspect of business and government operations. In a new book, Math you Can't Use: Patents, Copyright, and Software (Brookings 2005), author Ben Klemens discusses the theoretical structures and practical issues underlying patent and copyright law, the software business as it is practiced today, and software itself. Experts in the software field will join Dr. Klemens at a panel discussion to analyze whether the issues in applying patent law to software can be readily resolved, how the Patent Reform Act of 2005 can help or hinder the industry, and future prospects for software law in the European Union, India, and China and other fast-developing countries.

Event Information

When

Wednesday, December 07, 2005
3:00 PM to 5:00 PM

Where

Falk Auditorium
The Brookings Institution
1775 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, DC
Map

Event Materials

Contact: Office of Communications

E-mail: communications@brookings.edu

Phone: 202.797.6105

To date, patent law has been applied to software with virtually no modification. Few, if any, computer scientists and businessmen and women in the computing field are satisfied with how it has been transferred to software. Even copyright as applied to software has its pitfalls. Some recommend minor fixes to the existing regimes, and some recommend wholesale reform.

Panelists will take audience questions following their remarks.

Transcript

DANIEL RAVICHER: To me the goal of the patent system is to advance technology that is made available to the public, and so there is a point along that line at which, yes, encouraging investment does advance that end. Rewarding inventors, yes, can advance that end. But you can overcompensate in those areas, which then has a negative effect on advancing technology available to the public. And so anything that does not advance the technology that you, me, your mom, your grandma have access to is harmful and not the goal of the patent system.

Keeping your eye on the road means we have to be cognizant of where the reality is. There are speed bumps that come along the way. Let's not get distracted by individual isolated cases. When I see the press articles about, you know, the swing-sideways patent and how silly that is, I think that does a disservice to our discourse about this topic because there are more important issues going on here than just whether or not some 13-year-old got a patent on a sideways swing.

The Supreme Court cases, you know, the patent system has been characterized in our history as being very much one of mood swings. There was a very strong anti-patent mood in our courts many decades ago, and the response to that was a mood swing over to the opposite end and the creation of the federal circuit and modifications of patent law in Congress. And now there's a bit of a mood swing back, and maybe we don't want to be mood swinging so much as trying to plot out a direct course straight ahead.

Keep your eye on your wallet is my point to the general public to say think about how the patent system is affecting your daily life. Are things more expensive or cheaper? Are better technologies available or less available? How is the patent system affecting your life? Think about that, realize that, and then express your opinion.

And keeping your eye on the prize. How many people remember these? I was shown these when I was in elementary school about the civil rights movement in the '60s. There was a whole PBS special. Keep your eye on the prize means our laws should do good, right? Our laws should do beneficial things. Sometimes in the patent system we all get so focused in on, you know, should this patent be allowed or should it—I think it's good to step back and say, Is this benefiting society?

Read the full transcript (PDF𤹤kb)

Participants

Panel

Brian Kahin

Senior Fellow, Computer & Communications Industry Association

Daniel B. Ravicher

President, Executive Director Public Patent Foundation

Emery Simon

Counselor, Policy Council of the Business Software Alliance

Kenneth Dam

Nonresident Senior Fellow, Economic Studies


My Portfolio

My New Content

View suggested content based on items you have saved to your Portfolio.
Log in or register now