[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]
(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec)
(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
- From: PILCH Hartmut phm@a2e.de
- Subject: [Patents] Patent system run for consumers or producers?
- Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 23:58:10 +0200 (CEST)
> In fact, in such world, we would have a better basis to argue if
> there is a logical difference between a new hardware idea and a
> new software idea in terms of orginality, impact on the industry,
> hardware/software equivalence, etc.
Indeed.
So what about eliminating logic patents for the time being and testing
them again some time later when you have brought your ideal world closer
to reality?
Another way to give this a try would be to adopt something like the
logilege which I proposed here earlier.
This scheme solves the problems of novelty, non-obviousness,
reproducability etc and would allow us to test the impact of
idea ownership under very restrictive conditions.
Your approach seems to be to
(1) advocate a worldwide unlimited patent system (in which
I should probably even be able to patent my thinking before I publish
it here: I should be able to decide which country may adopt the logilege
and
which not, since the ideas are mine, and the BGH technicity theory
should belong to Germany only, unless the BGH licenses it to other
countries, ...)
(2) promote the growth of the USPTO bureaucracy and provide them with
monetary incentives to grant as many patents as possible
(you are advocating this on Patnews all the time)
(3) pretend to have a solution for the problem of novelty
(4) pretend that other criteria such as non-obviousness etc can be
handled and would suffice to produce a good patent system
(5) oppose any efforts for a more immediate cure of urgent pains,
demand that the public must be willing to act as a laboratory rabbit
in futile social experiments with broken institutions
This very much reminds me of the ideologues of the declining system of
"real existing socialism" in East Germany. I'd call this "real existing
proprietarism". Of course it is a very honourable variant, because at
least you seem to be strongly engaged in fighting for improvements. In
fact many of those who stuck to the ideals of East German socialism were
those who actually brought the system down. When it fell, these people
fell into oblivion, because the general public was not interested in their
dreams.
-phm
- [Patents] Patent system run for consumers or producers?, (continued)
- [Patents] Patent system run for consumers or producers?,
Martin Wahlén mva
- [Patents] Patent system run for consumers or producers?,
PILCH Hartmut phm
- [Patents] Patent system run for consumers or producers?,
PILCH Hartmut phm
- [Patents] Patent system run for consumers or producers?,
Gregory Aharonian srctran
- [Patents] Patent system run for consumers or producers?,
PILCH Hartmut phm
- [Patents] Patent system run for consumers or producers?,
Gregory Aharonian srctran
- [Patents] Patent system run for consumers or producers?,
Martin Wahlén mva
- [Patents] Patent system run for consumers or producers?,
Gregory Aharonian srctran
- [Patents] Patent system run for consumers or producers?,
Martin Wahlén mva
- [Patents] Patent system run for consumers or producers?,
PILCH Hartmut phm
- [Patents] Patent system run for consumers or producers?, PILCH Hartmut phm
- [Patents] Patent system run for consumers or producers?,
Francois PELLEGRINI pelegrin
- [Patents] Patent system run for consumers or producers?,
Morten S . Nielsen msn
(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.
(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)