On Wed, Aug 4, 2021 at 2:15 PM Phil Bouchard <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> BTW thank God software can now be patented. Here's my anecdote:
>
> - I was working for Corel Linux back in 2000 until Microsoft dissolved it;
>
> - I wrote my own Fornux Powercalc and proposed it to Microsoft but got
> silently embraced and extended my Microsoft Powertoys:
>
> https://github.com/philippeb8/fcalc
>
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6f/Powercalc.PNG
>
> - Herb Sutter from Microsoft almost embraced and extended the logic of
> Root Pointer:
>
> https://github.com/hsutter/gcpp
>
>
> So sorry for the patent implications but this is the only way to protect
> ourselves these days.
>

I fear software patent trolls more than I do corporations extending
standards in order to lock-in their customers. At least with the latter, I
can still choose to adopt the original standard (e.g. POSIX vs Win32 API).
I fear software patents will end up creating a minefield where only big
corporations with an army of lawyers can play.

It's ironic that you complain about Microsoft embracing and extending
standards for their own profit, while you propose to do the same thing by
embracing C++ and extending it with the apparent motive of earning profit
off of your (pending) patent.

There are plenty of patented encryption algorithms that have languished in
obscurity, where they otherwise might have benefited society had the author
decided not to patent it.

Cheers,
Emile Cormier