public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stuart Herbert <stuart@gentoo.org>
To: Luke-Jr <luke-jr@gentoo.org>,
	matt@legalizefreedom.org, gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] European Patentability rules
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 11:29:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200308281129.04996.stuart@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200308280410.29055.luke-jr@gentoo.org>

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1716 bytes --]

On Thursday 28 August 2003 5:10 am, Luke-Jr wrote:
> You do realize what patents are, right? 

Yes.  My question wasn't about patents (a *system* of IPR protection), but 
about whether or not an individual or organisation should have the *moral* 
right to protect and earn revenue from their IPR.

> This would be like saying just
> because HP invented remote access first, noone else can invent it
> independantly. 

Well, that *is* how other fields of human endeavour have to work.  They just 
seem to have found a more balanced way to dealing with it.

> Even if someone does invent something, they should only have
> exclusive right to use it for 10 years, and only if they tell others how to
> create it. I don't see how you could believe anything else (at least as far
> as the patents are concerned) is morally acceptable, let alone see the
> other view as immoral. --

I agree that their needs to be time and scope limitations, acceptable fair-use 
provisions, and full disclosure (as part of any registration process!) for 
IPR protection.  Any creditable system needs to be balanced.

But to simply say that there shouldn't be any form of protection for IPR isn't 
a position I'm willing to agree with.

Best regards,
Stu
-- 
Stuart Herbert                                              stuart@gentoo.org
Gentoo Developer                                       http://www.gentoo.org/
Beta packages for download            http://dev.gentoo.org/~stuart/packages/
Come and meet me in March 2004                 http://www.phparch.com/cruise/

GnuGP key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu
Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319  C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C
--

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2003-08-28 10:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-08-27 20:33 [gentoo-dev] European Patentability rules Philippe Lafoucrière
2003-08-27 21:13 ` Markus Nigbur
2003-08-27 21:35   ` Matt Chorman
2003-08-28  1:44     ` Stuart Herbert
2003-08-28  4:10       ` Luke-Jr
2003-08-28 10:29         ` Stuart Herbert [this message]
2003-08-28 11:27           ` Sven Vermeulen
2003-08-28  8:59       ` Sven Vermeulen
2003-08-28 11:28         ` Stuart Herbert
2003-08-28  9:29     ` Paul de Vrieze
2003-08-28 13:49 ` Lars Weiler
2003-08-28 16:03   ` Philippe Lafoucrière
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-08-27 22:48 Joshua Brindle

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200308281129.04996.stuart@gentoo.org \
    --to=stuart@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@gentoo.org \
    --cc=luke-jr@gentoo.org \
    --cc=matt@legalizefreedom.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox