[Patents] patent pools enforcing per-copy-licensing mode of software development

[PILCH Hartmut phm@a2e.de]

> > I am talking of public interest, not public opinion.
> > The issue requires economic, technological, sociological analysis, in
> > order to decide where the public interest lies.
> > 
> > Public opinion is essentially irrelevant.  Even corporate opinions.
> > 
> 
> I for one do not like the idea of people doing things 'in the public
>  interest' without actually asking the public what they want. I am 
> sure that the spanish inquisition thought they were acting in the "public
>  interest" in butchering heretics all those centuries ago, and I for one 
> feel
>  you would do well to remember the famous phrase "there are lies, damned 
> lies and statistics" before you use any "analysis" to determine where the
> public interest lies. I for one, prefer to be asked first rather than be 
> told
> what is best for me. 

Political actors will in any case claim to be acting in public interest.  
The fact that this is claimed for some action tells you nothing about that
action, but much about the importance of public interest. As Bernard said,
a lot of analysis is required for determining where p.i. really lies.  
Not even 60000 signatures or still stronger expressions of public opinion
can substitute this analysis.  Nor is there any analysis procedure that
could guarantee that the p.i. will be correctly identified.  Nobody knows
for sure where the public interest lies, but everybody needs to search for
it.  And as a result of good searching by many people the picture will
become clear to some extent.  It is already quite clear in the case of
swpat.  This debate has matured in quantity and quality to an above
average extent, so that there may be a gradual convergence between public
opinion and public interest.

-phm