Inventor?
Inventor?
Sunday, January 1, 2012 - 00:39
I have a question I think could be an interesting discussion for all of us. The term “inventor”, could you consider a programmer an “inventor”? After all someone who invents something is a person is creates something new. Me and my wife had a lovely discussion about this and we were unsure.
Def: A person who invented a particular process or device or who invents things as an occupation.
If a programmer or person in any field creates something new and unique, then I would consider that person to have invented something. If they invent with inventing as a goal I would consider them to be an inventor. Looking at a programmer specifically I wouldn't consider a programmer an inventor unless he created something significant enough to be considered and invention. For example the first high level computer language or network protocol, or the first compression algorithm could possibly be identified as an invention. But for someone to code their own "pong" game, well then I would just think that to be a creation. And as such they are developers or even creationists?
Just my thoughts on the matter...
This is what my friend had to say about the matter but still debatable I think to a degree. Think of a car. every year a new car is created but we dont think of it as a new invention but it has a patent. so by law its a new invention. So where should we draw the line?
Inventor is a legal term that is connected with patents. If a programmer has created something new, that an existing product can not lay claim to, then they should be able to patent the algorithm. In that case they would be a patented inventor. Here is an interesting article that compares the distinction between an author and an inventor.
http://www.bios.net/daisy/patentlens/g4/tutorials/205.html
Steven Bradley
Source:http://www.globalgameware.com/node/50
I'm highly skeptical of the idea that people ever "invent" anything. It's not like we make things possible that weren't before; we merely discover that they were possible all along. Moreover, invention doesn't come from divine inspiration, but by recombining what came before. (There is even a field of engineering that formalizes the process.) That's why people working independently so often make the same inventions at the same time. And we, as a society, reward the one who can run faster to the patent office! Not to mention the harm done by delaying every little progress by decades, because the first version of an invention is often terrible, and it's subsequent innovators that turn it into something useful.
And then there are computer programs that invent new algorithms. So much for human "inventors" doing something unique and special...
From a non-legal point of view, I'd say that things like a new programming language is created, not invented. And things like algorithms are discovered, I would say.
From a legal point, I oppose software patents.
"every year a new car is created but we dont think of it as a new invention but it has a patent."
Cars may use patented technology, but I'm not sure in which sense there is a patent for each new car?