[dvd-discuss] Does software really satisfy the requirements for Copyright?

[John Schulien <jms(at)uic.edu>]

> The only softare patent I come close to agreeing with is the RSA
patent on
> encrypting with trap door functions. That was clearly non-obvious to
somebody
> competent in the field. It took a PHD Math Professor to discover it.
And it
> was truly novel and unique.

I disagree.   A patent is not supposed to be a prize for cleverness.
The purpose
of patents is to promote progress by encouraging disclosure of
inventions. that
would otherwise not be disclosed.  The societal value of a patent is the
placement
of a valuable trade secret into the public domain, albeit in a delayed
fashion.

In the world of cryptography, secret algorithms are considered useless.
Only
peer-reviewed algorithms are ever given any credibility by the
cryptographic
community.   It is very unlikely that RSA could have ever been
commercially
exploited as a trade secret algorithm.  The algorithm would have never
been
accepted.

It is also unlikely that the inventors of  RSA, being members of the
academic
community, would have concealed their breakthrough if patent protection
were unavailable.   Most likely they would have simply done what
academics
have always done -- publish their successful work.

Contrast this with, for instance, a patent granted on an industrial
chemical
process -- say an improved method of removing impurities from gasoline.
Such a process would be extremely valuable as a trade secret -- the
company
that invented it could very well set up a purifying plant, and purify
gasoline
as an ongoing business, never disclosing the purification procedure.  In

such a case, granting a patent would benefit society by placing in the
public
domain a valuable trade secret that would have otherwise remained
concealed.