just wait and see

When the first spreadsheet program was made it revolutionised business. It became known as a ‘killer application’ because it alone made having a computer worthwhile to many businesses. If software such as this is made the owner should get recognised. It is ground breaking and the creator should be rewarded for his/her amazing talent.

However these days rarely does software gets created that is of this calibre. But the low quality software that is created is treated as if it has the right to the same spotlight.

If you talk to a programmer you will always hear how the profit driven managers always push them to create code cheaper. This profit motivation leads to low quality software. In fact programmers trying to create solid code will often be scolded for wasting company time.

If an individual or team creates a killer application that is coded well they should be rewarded. They should have market dominance to allow them to recoup the costs of the application and be profit for their contribution to society.

Companies that push for lower quality code then create a vague patent should not be rewarded, this is not innovation nor is it contributing to society.

Until patent cases learn to distinguish the two legislation will always be messy and will never promote innovation.

********

Patents should probably be awarded to people, not to companies. Company patents lead to hoarding while personal patents would lead to companies hiring amazing developers so they can create the innovative products.