[Patents] natural forces

[Bernard Lang Bernard.Lang@inria.fr]

So Greg, you are also in favor of patenting mathematical proofs.  Is
it mathematical proofs as such, or only mathematical proofs that have
a technical effect ?  Sorry... I forgot that technical effect is a
meaningless concept ...

   well ... you see what I mean  ... don't you

Bernard


On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 05:28:07PM -0500, Gregory Aharonian wrote:
> Hartmut writes:
> >The basis of modern democracy lies in the distinction between information
> >and matter.
> 
> Nonsense.  At least for Americans, the basis of modern democracy is rights
> such as one-person one-private vote, the protection due citizens under
> the Constitution and Bill of rights, checks and balances in government.
> 
> The distinction between information and matter has little to d with
> democratic rights, and in fact it is questionable whether such a
> distinction philosophically exists.  Under statistical physics,
> information/entropy is relatable to energy, and under relativity,
> energy is relatable to matter.  Under physics then, information is
> relatable to matter, for example, the many discussions about what
> happens to the information inherent in matter when the matter is
> sucked down a black hole (is the information lost from the universe,
> or is it stored somehow in the black hole, and potentially accessible
> when the black hole evaporates?).
> 
> Combine the equality of information and matter in physics, with the
> automata equality of hardware and software in mathematics, and you
> end up with a pretty weak case for this distinction Hartmut uses as
> a basis for having a distinction between patenting of hardware and
> software.
> 
> So if I have to choose between well-defined modern physics and mathematics
> and the non-well-defined decisions of a German court no one seems to
> care to publish in English, I choose mathematics and physics.
> 
> And more strongly believe that those against software patents are
> against hardware patents, and therefore all patents, as well.  Their
> arguments apply generally, against all sorts of patents, not just
> hardware.  Software is a more publicly visible target, but it is
> all patentability that is under attack.  The distinctions are not
> supportable with modern science.
> 
> Greg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Patents maillist  -  Patents@liberte.aful.org
> http://liberte.aful.org/mailman/listinfo/patents

-- 
         Non aux Brevets Logiciels  -  No to Software Patents
           SIGNEZ    http://petition.eurolinux.org/    SIGN

Bernard.Lang@inria.fr             ,_  /\o    \o/    Tel  +33 1 3963 5644
http://pauillac.inria.fr/~lang/  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  Fax  +33 1 3963 5469
            INRIA / B.P. 105 / 78153 Le Chesnay CEDEX / France
         Je n'exprime que mon opinion - I express only my opinion
                 CAGED BEHIND WINDOWS or FREE WITH LINUX