From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12818 invoked by uid 1002); 28 Aug 2003 01:46:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 19790 invoked from network); 28 Aug 2003 01:46:32 -0000 From: Stuart Herbert To: matt@legalizefreedom.org, gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 02:44:08 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3 References: <1062016412.3111.3.camel@biproc> <20030827231334.4d70b88d.pYrania@c0ffeine.de> <200308271435.43103.matt@legalizefreedom.org> In-Reply-To: <200308271435.43103.matt@legalizefreedom.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Boundary-02=_v5VT/qMw6L1wARf"; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200308280244.15864.stuart@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] European Patentability rules X-Archives-Salt: 451a9a1d-1ead-40db-98b1-56550e41df25 X-Archives-Hash: 961ec38b0a2dcaccd52769a2869adf34 --Boundary-02=_v5VT/qMw6L1wARf Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Description: signed data Content-Disposition: inline On Wednesday 27 August 2003 10:35 pm, Matt Chorman wrote: > It's amazing to me that any open-source developer would agree with softwa= re > patents.=20 The current software patent system you have over there in America has been = a=20 source of much merriment on this side of the pond over the last few years ;= =2D) =20 At least, it was until the beaurocrats over here decided it was a good idea= =20 to install something similar :( Personally, I believe that some form of IPR protection is morally right, no= =20 matter what the field of endeavour. Unfortunately, no-one seems to have=20 invented a creditable form of IPR protection which would seem fair in the=20 computing world. Let's say that HP *did* actually invent remote access to another computer. = =20 (Two disclaimers: first, I've worked for HP in the past, and second I have = no=20 idea whether the patent in question is creditable or not) Why shouldn't th= ey=20 be entitled to protect their IPR, and to earn revenue from it? Never mind= =20 the details, it's a simple yes or no question of morals. Now let's look at the music industry as a parallel. Songs aren't patented = (at=20 least, I've never heard of one that is :), but they are copyrighted. The=20 performance is copyrighted. The original music is also copyrighted, often= =20 seperately. So, if you wanted to use a sample of Hendrix on your own song,= =20 you'd need permission from whoever holds the copyright to the actual=20 *performance* that you've sampled. But, if you want to publish your own=20 performance of a Hendrix song, you need permission from whoever owns the=20 copyright to Hendrix's original music. > While you're at it, look up 6,611,268. Then look up all patents where the > Assignee is Microsoft or HP. Then think about the implications of the SCO > lawsuit and what these companies can do if the courts don't reject SCO's > argument. There is a major differnese between software patents and > copyrights. Copyright=3Dgood. Software patent=3Dbad. The *system* you've got is bad. It is without any sense of balance. But=20 remember: it's your system, put in place by your government. And its the=20 citizens who put the government in place (well, it used to work that way on= ce=20 ;) Protection for IPR itself isn't a bad concept. It's been a key part of the= =20 commerce-based way of life in the West since before 1449 AD. Stopping the= =20 current software process patenting nonsense is good and worthy. But the ne= ed=20 *is* there, as well as the moral right, and this is where campaigners such = as=20 yourself always fail to convince me. Propose and demonstrate a creditable alternative legal framework for IPR=20 protection, and you'll have my vote. But until then ... Best regards, Stu =2D-=20 Stuart Herbert stuart@gentoo.o= rg Gentoo Developer http://www.gentoo.or= g/ Beta packages for download http://dev.gentoo.org/~stuart/package= s/ Come and meet me in March 2004 http://www.phparch.com/cruis= e/ GnuGP key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu Key fingerprint =3D 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319 C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C =2D- --Boundary-02=_v5VT/qMw6L1wARf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA/TV5vDC+AuvmvxXwRAtf0AJ94m9vJ5xVwQmnSPit6bSI8K8ktgACghT6H KczhiybtsCUb1S6t9kVmQck= =TpD9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Boundary-02=_v5VT/qMw6L1wARf--