When someone creates a “new technology” how much of this is really just innovation & adaptation? These days I find that most of what people call “new” is really just a minor piece being added to an existing product or service. Is it then truly new? What is it that makes it new?
In my personal opinion for something to be new requires a certain amount of inventiveness. When a product is created it may be a new product but how much of it actually “new” & how much is really just the same with a different flavour, packet or other cosmetic change.
When it comes to technology it gets even harder. Why ? Because when you are dealing with an idea it gets more difficult to quantify it as new. Also there is a very tight overlap between an existing product or idea & a new way of producing it or a newly invented piece that can be placed into the product. Then you also have “programs” which get invented. This is a contentious area currently & can be fought well by others. One side is for patents in software & another side are not.
The idea is rather simple – when utilising a language (which programs are built in) you are not able to own the variations in that language. When a new program is written it is only written within the bounds of the language it is composed in. This is the thoughts behind no patents for programs. I’m not saying you can’t own it, sell it etc.
Now I understand that music is in the same category and you don’t see them patenting and launching court battles.