|
|
|
|
|
by bad_user
933 days ago
|
|
Math should be patentable, too. I see no reason for why not. The old argument that it's discovered rather than invented is bullshit. Multiple people can always have the same idea for an invention because we think alike and live in the same environment. Or just ban patents altogether. Of course, this may discourage companies from investing in R&D and that's the real problem: how expensive is it to invent something, and does it justify a 20-year monopoly? But there are no good answers here, and trying to draw a line between math and non-math is bollocks. |
|
Patents exist to incentivize invention. As long as mathematicians are content to do mathematics for the love of it, and they certainly are, there’s no need for mathematical patents.
Practically speaking, mathematical ideas are building blocks not products. Patents on mathematical ideas discourage invention rather than encouraging it because they prevent use of that idea in new products - an idea that would have been discovered anyway. For example the parents of elliptic curve cryptography and arithmetic coding were hugely damaging to invention overall. Patenting a new kind of cork screw doesn’t have this problem, it’s a destination, not an intermediate.