Protection mechanisms for software is a controversial subject. It has been problematic finding the best way to approach this issue. Software developers and large companies have had many issues with both copyright and patent. Patent is a legal concept that defines rights to intellectual property. Patents protect inventions of devices and processes, giving the inventor a complete monopoly on the invention for a specific time period. It is debatable whether or not patents should protect software because of the fact that software can be classified as either an invention and as writing.
A patent is defined as the exclusive right by a government to an inventor to manufacture, use, or sell an invention or process for a certain number of years. By this definition, it qualifies as an appropriate means of protection for software. However, when people define/describe software as writing, many people do not agree that this qualifies for a patent. The problem is that software is too broad of a field, and different programs can be considered an invention or writing. Critics of patents believe that they stifle innovation on the Web, while others believe that patents protect innovation. I personally believe that patents are a sufficient protection for software. The inventor of popular techniques deserves credit. They deserve to be recognized for their idea.
Patents only protect within the country that grants the patent, and a company must reapply for patents in numerous countries in order to protect their invention. I feel that a global standard would be beneficial. Otherwise, these companies are spending a lot of time and money on this process. If an executive board consisting of many countries is set up, I think that a global standard can be possible.