[Patents] RE: censorship and list moderation / Patents digest, Vol 1 #467

[FranciscoM@bsa.org (Francisco Mingorance)]

Hi moderator,
To the moderator:

Dear moderator,
I used to manage network of moderated email lists with over 10'000
registered members (www.fdp.org) - and sometimes with up to 10 moderators.
Our main topic was health and affordable medications (HIV, malaria, etc.) in
Africa but you might nevertheless be interested in some of the basic
mechanisms and guidelines we used to guaranty diversity and openness in all
debates. If so, I would be pleased to share with you some of these materials
or discuss it directly with you.
Kind regards,
Francisco Mingorance



 -----Original Message-----
From:   patents-request@liberte.aful.org
[mailto:patents-request@liberte.aful.org] ;
Sent:   Monday, April 30, 2001 6:28 PM
To:     patents@liberte.aful.org
Subject:        Patents digest, Vol 1 #467 - 8 msgs

Send Patents mailing list submissions to
        patents@liberte.aful.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://liberte.aful.org/mailman/listinfo/patents
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        patents-request@liberte.aful.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
        patents-admin@liberte.aful.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Patents digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. provoking censorship (PILCH Hartmut)
   2. Re: Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April 26,      2001
(Susan.Bishop@ewos.com)
   3. Re: Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April 26, 2001 (Roland
Orre)
   4. Re: Re: difficulty vs technicity (PILCH Hartmut)
   5. Re: Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April 26, 2001 (Roland
Orre)
   6. Re: Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April 26, 2001 (Krueger,
Jason C.)
   7. Re: Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April 26, 2001 (Roland
Orre)
   8. Re: Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April 26, 2001 (l b)

--__--__--

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 12:55:22 +0200 (CEST)
From: PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>
To: Jorge Zickermann <jzickermann@mail.EUnet.pt>
Cc: "webmaster@softwarelaw.com" <softwarelaw@lawyer.com>,
        <patents@liberte.aful.org>, <epo@mlist.austria.eu.net>
Subject: [Patents] provoking censorship

> Shouldn=B4t these debates be moderated by an administrator in order to
> keep the standard of the newsgroup? I=B4ve seen that done before and it
> makes the Internet a better place. A bit like police on the streets.

I have also gone through this in at least one mailing list.
The patter is as follows:

There is a dangerous dissident opinion that part of the readers need to
exclude from the forum.
An agent provocateur turns up, responding to this need.
The provocation escalates to libel or similar
(e.g. "anarchists threatening the physical safety of PA
Smith, who had to remove his website from the net").
This again leades to endless meta-debates which are tiresome to the
normal readers.
The partisans of the agent provocateur intensify the flamewar.
A majority of unattentive readers tends to blame those with the dissident
opinion, whom they found disturbing in the first place.
=3D=3D> A new regime of mailing list censorship is established.

Actually this is a common mechanism for derailing democracy, not only on
the Net.  Think of the Reichstag fire.  We just received a letter
instigating us to physically harm "Mr. Smith".  Maybe "Mr. Smith" is only
a fiction, and the known article writer is just as much a victim of
cowardly libel as the Eurolinux group is.

When advance and the socially responsible people prefer to keep their
mouth shut, finally an authoritarian regime may even become an objective
necessity.  But we are very far away from there, and I am grateful to see
that at least the moderator seems to have his eyes open and to be
committed to a free and productive discussion.

-phm




--__--__--

Message: 2
Subject: Re: [Patents] Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April 26, 2001
To: jzickermann@mail.EUnet.pt
Cc: ebner@epo.co.at, epo@mlist.austria.eu.net,
        patents@liberte.aful.org, softwarelaw@lawyer.com
From: Susan.Bishop@ewos.com
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 12:08:45 +0100


No.  Moderation smacks of Big Brother.  We are all adult enough to police
ourselves, surely.  If we ignore adolescent comments their perpetrators
will soon shut up.





--__--__--

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 13:22:47 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Roland Orre <orre@nada.kth.se>
To: Jorge Zickermann <jzickermann@mail.EUnet.pt>
Cc: "webmaster@softwarelaw.com" <softwarelaw@lawyer.com>,
        <patents@liberte.aful.org>, <epo@mlist.austria.eu.net>
Subject: Re: [Patents] Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April 26, 2001

On Mon, 30 Apr 2001, Jorge Zickermann wrote:
> Shouldn´t these debates be moderated by an administrator in order to keep
> the standard of the newsgroup? I´ve seen that done before and it makes the
> Internet a better place. A bit like police on the streets.

Roland Orre answers:

That what you Mr Zickermann are suggesing is a very dangerous idea,
even though it  may sound harmless at first sight.
What guarantee is there that the moderator works for the public good
and is not biased in any way?

In this case it would have had the effect that Mr Smith's very
provocative statement had never become published, and my strong
reaction towards this, thus had then never occured.

But, imagine the danger if Mr Smith's message had slipped through the
moderator but my response to his message had been judged as
too emotional. That would have been very serious. Consider the
consequences.

So Mr Zickerman, the only thing which is comparable to polices on
the streets considering internet is that people are reading these
messages. That's the only democratic way.
It should be in each person's interest to express himself or herself
in a way which is as good as possible considering all the people
watching.

You can NEVER put this responsibility on one single person. Even
though this person being the moderator have the best intentions,
being the best possible altruist you can find, he or she may have
some sligth bias in opinion, which may affect what is getting
through or not.

        Roland Orre
        Professional software developer
        Fighting for a free world without dangerous
        software patents.

> > From: PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>
> > Reply-To: PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>
> > Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 20:39:55 +0200 (CEST)
> > To: "webmaster@softwarelaw.com" <softwarelaw@lawyer.com>
> > Cc: <patents@liberte.aful.org>, <epo@mlist.austria.eu.net>
> > Subject: Re: Re: [Patents] Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April
26,
> > 2001
> >
> > Fred Mobach wrote:
> >
> >> Long time ago I saw such childish behavior on the net. Or maybe an
> >> adolescent who wrote this.
> >
> > Unfortunately Mr. Smith is not an adolescent but a well-known writer of
> > pro software patent articles on renowned patent law magazines.
> >
> > Mr. Smith, I hope to see you putting back his website online without
much
> > delay and declaring in public that you are not in physical danger and
that
> > you are sorry for having acted in a way suitable to create that
> > impression.
> >
> > Otherwise I may report the case to a criminal prosecutor.
> >
> > Libel itself is the first stage in a development toward nasty warfare
> > which we don't want to see getting started.  I also beg all patent
> > professionals on this list to take appropriate steps to make it clear
> > that, no matter how strongly you may support Mr. Smith's opinion on
> > software patents, you do not approve of his libel tactics or what might
> > look like such tactics. By making that clear, you can counteract the
> > necessity of getting criminal authorities involved in a discourse that
> > should be purely aimed at enhancing mutual understanding.
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Hartmut Pilch
> > Federation for a Free Information Infrastructure
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > This message was distributed by the EPO mailing list.
> > Information on how to leave this mailinglist can be found at:
> > http://www.european-patent-office.org/mail.htm
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Patents maillist  -  Patents@liberte.aful.org
> http://liberte.aful.org/mailman/listinfo/patents
>



--__--__--

Message: 4
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 13:55:17 +0200 (CEST)
From: PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>
To: <Luuk.van.Dijk@xs4all.nl>
Cc: "Ram'on Garc'ia Fern'andez" <ramon@jl1.quim.ucm.es>,
        <patents@liberte.aful.org>
Subject: Re: [Patents] Re: difficulty vs technicity

> We studied these a bit and found they were unsuitable as a model for
> tougher criteria on patents, because they were so vague and left the
> end judgement to a civil 'expert', offering no solution to the
> problems that plague patent judgements.

Would things become different if you apply them to 100 EPO test cases and
explain to what extent these patent claims would have to be rejected based
on those criteria.

> Now the clue to this story is, that in practice /hardly anyone/ gets a
> grant under the WBSO for software development, because these vague
> criteria are applied so strictly!  Could it be that the interests of
> the judging party are just a bit different when it comes to handing
> out money rather than monopolies?

Maybe patent fees should be abolished and instead the patent courts should
receive a fee for each patent they revoke.  This could be fine-tuned until
the difficulty standard appears to come close to what was decided based on
the 100 model cases.

-phm





--__--__--

Message: 5
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 13:55:56 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Roland Orre <orre@nada.kth.se>
To: Jorge Zickermann <jzickermann@mail.EUnet.pt>
Cc: "webmaster@softwarelaw.com" <softwarelaw@lawyer.com>,
        <patents@liberte.aful.org>, <epo@mlist.austria.eu.net>
Subject: Re: [patents] Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April 26, 2001

(sorry if some of you got two copies of my reply. Due to a technicality
 I had to resend it and I wanted to preserve the CC-structure)

On Mon, 30 Apr 2001, Jorge Zickermann wrote:
> Shouldn´t these debates be moderated by an administrator in order to keep
> the standard of the newsgroup? I´ve seen that done before and it makes the
> Internet a better place. A bit like police on the streets.

Roland Orre answers:

That what you Mr Zickermann are suggesting is a very dangerous idea,
even though it  may sound harmless at first sight.
What guarantee is there that the moderator works for the public good
and is not biased in any way?

In this case it would have had the effect that Mr Smith's very
provocative statement had never become published, and my strong
reaction towards this, thus had then never occured.

But, imagine the danger if Mr Smith's message had slipped through the
moderator but my response to his message had been judged as
too emotional. That would have been very serious. Consider the
consequences.

So Mr Zickerman, the only thing which is comparable to polices on
the streets considering internet is that people are reading these
messages. That's the only democratic way.

Remember that the police is being watched by the people too. We
don't want dictatorship, do we?

It should be in each person's interest to express himself or herself
in a way which is as good as possible considering all the people
watching.

You can NEVER put this responsibility on one single person. Even
though this person being the moderator has the best intentions,
being the best possible altruist you can find, he or she may have
some sligth bias in opinion, which may affect what is getting
through or not.

        Roland Orre
        Professional software developer
        Fighting for a free world without dangerous
        software patents.

> > From: PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>
> > Reply-To: PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>
> > Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 20:39:55 +0200 (CEST)
> > To: "webmaster@softwarelaw.com" <softwarelaw@lawyer.com>
> > Cc: <patents@liberte.aful.org>, <epo@mlist.austria.eu.net>
> > Subject: Re: Re: [Patents] Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April
26,
> > 2001
> >
> > Fred Mobach wrote:
> >
> >> Long time ago I saw such childish behavior on the net. Or maybe an
> >> adolescent who wrote this.
> >
> > Unfortunately Mr. Smith is not an adolescent but a well-known writer of
> > pro software patent articles on renowned patent law magazines.
> >
> > Mr. Smith, I hope to see you putting back his website online without
much
> > delay and declaring in public that you are not in physical danger and
that
> > you are sorry for having acted in a way suitable to create that
> > impression.
> >
> > Otherwise I may report the case to a criminal prosecutor.
> >
> > Libel itself is the first stage in a development toward nasty warfare
> > which we don't want to see getting started.  I also beg all patent
> > professionals on this list to take appropriate steps to make it clear
> > that, no matter how strongly you may support Mr. Smith's opinion on
> > software patents, you do not approve of his libel tactics or what might
> > look like such tactics. By making that clear, you can counteract the
> > necessity of getting criminal authorities involved in a discourse that
> > should be purely aimed at enhancing mutual understanding.
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Hartmut Pilch
> > Federation for a Free Information Infrastructure
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > This message was distributed by the EPO mailing list.
> > Information on how to leave this mailinglist can be found at:
> > http://www.european-patent-office.org/mail.htm
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Patents maillist  -  Patents@liberte.aful.org
> http://liberte.aful.org/mailman/listinfo/patents
>


_______________________________________________
Patents maillist  -  Patents@liberte.aful.org
http://liberte.aful.org/mailman/listinfo/patents



--__--__--

Message: 6
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 11:00:34 -0500
From: "Krueger, Jason C." <JCKRUEGER@stthomas.edu>
Subject: Re: [patents] Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April 26, 2001
To: Roland Orre <orre@nada.kth.se>,
        Jorge Zickermann <jzickermann@mail.EUnet.pt>
Cc: "webmaster@softwarelaw.com" <softwarelaw@lawyer.com>,
        patents@liberte.aful.org, epo@mlist.austria.eu.net

What a joke, you all call this professionalism?  I am a university student,
and am on this list in order to gain insight in regards to current patent
issues.  However, this is not what I expected.  In fact, this is a waste of
my time.
In all, some of you, NOT all of you, in my opinion, are representing your
field unprofessionally.

Sincerely,

Jason C. Krueger

----- Original Message -----
From: "Roland Orre" <orre@nada.kth.se>
To: "Jorge Zickermann" <jzickermann@mail.EUnet.pt>
Cc: "webmaster@softwarelaw.com" <softwarelaw@lawyer.com>;
<patents@liberte.aful.org>; <epo@mlist.austria.eu.net>
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 6:55 AM
Subject: Re: [patents] Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April 26, 2001


(sorry if some of you got two copies of my reply. Due to a technicality
 I had to resend it and I wanted to preserve the CC-structure)

On Mon, 30 Apr 2001, Jorge Zickermann wrote:
> Shouldn´t these debates be moderated by an administrator in order to keep
> the standard of the newsgroup? I´ve seen that done before and it makes the
> Internet a better place. A bit like police on the streets.

Roland Orre answers:

That what you Mr Zickermann are suggesting is a very dangerous idea,
even though it  may sound harmless at first sight.
What guarantee is there that the moderator works for the public good
and is not biased in any way?

In this case it would have had the effect that Mr Smith's very
provocative statement had never become published, and my strong
reaction towards this, thus had then never occured.

But, imagine the danger if Mr Smith's message had slipped through the
moderator but my response to his message had been judged as
too emotional. That would have been very serious. Consider the
consequences.

So Mr Zickerman, the only thing which is comparable to polices on
the streets considering internet is that people are reading these
messages. That's the only democratic way.

Remember that the police is being watched by the people too. We
don't want dictatorship, do we?

It should be in each person's interest to express himself or herself
in a way which is as good as possible considering all the people
watching.

You can NEVER put this responsibility on one single person. Even
though this person being the moderator has the best intentions,
being the best possible altruist you can find, he or she may have
some sligth bias in opinion, which may affect what is getting
through or not.

Roland Orre
Professional software developer
Fighting for a free world without dangerous
software patents.

> > From: PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>
> > Reply-To: PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>
> > Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 20:39:55 +0200 (CEST)
> > To: "webmaster@softwarelaw.com" <softwarelaw@lawyer.com>
> > Cc: <patents@liberte.aful.org>, <epo@mlist.austria.eu.net>
> > Subject: Re: Re: [Patents] Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April
26,
> > 2001
> >
> > Fred Mobach wrote:
> >
> >> Long time ago I saw such childish behavior on the net. Or maybe an
> >> adolescent who wrote this.
> >
> > Unfortunately Mr. Smith is not an adolescent but a well-known writer of
> > pro software patent articles on renowned patent law magazines.
> >
> > Mr. Smith, I hope to see you putting back his website online without
much
> > delay and declaring in public that you are not in physical danger and
that
> > you are sorry for having acted in a way suitable to create that
> > impression.
> >
> > Otherwise I may report the case to a criminal prosecutor.
> >
> > Libel itself is the first stage in a development toward nasty warfare
> > which we don't want to see getting started.  I also beg all patent
> > professionals on this list to take appropriate steps to make it clear
> > that, no matter how strongly you may support Mr. Smith's opinion on
> > software patents, you do not approve of his libel tactics or what might
> > look like such tactics. By making that clear, you can counteract the
> > necessity of getting criminal authorities involved in a discourse that
> > should be purely aimed at enhancing mutual understanding.
> >
> > Thank you
> >
> > Hartmut Pilch
> > Federation for a Free Information Infrastructure
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > This message was distributed by the EPO mailing list.
> > Information on how to leave this mailinglist can be found at:
> > http://www.european-patent-office.org/mail.htm
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Patents maillist  -  Patents@liberte.aful.org
> http://liberte.aful.org/mailman/listinfo/patents
>


_______________________________________________
Patents maillist  -  Patents@liberte.aful.org
http://liberte.aful.org/mailman/listinfo/patents

----------------------------------------------------------------------
This message was distributed by the EPO mailing list.
Information on how to leave this mailinglist can be found at:
http://www.european-patent-office.org/mail.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------




--__--__--

Message: 7
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 18:08:54 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Roland Orre <orre@nada.kth.se>
To: PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>
Subject: Re: [Patents] Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April 26, 2001
Cc: patents@liberte.aful.org,
        "Ram'on Garc'ia Fern'andez" <ramon@jl1.quim.ucm.es>,
        <softwarelaw@lawyer.com>, epo@mlist.austria.eu.net
Reply-To: orre@nada.kth.se (Roland Orre)

Roland says:
Somebody calling itself "l b <pubs@linuxwaves.com>" obviously has
unsubscribed to some list by telling us:
> Mr. Pilch,
> 
> I have unsubscribed from this list.
> 
> Good luck with your pissing contest.

Roland continues:
As this person obviously used "BCC" or some other anonymous way of
forwarding the list, whichever it was, I got the message from somewhere,
I forward this reply to patents@liberte.aful.org and some of the
other lists which I found to be the most likely recipients, from my own
perspective.

I think it is a good advice to anyone speaking in circumstances like
these that they sign whatever they write with their full name if
it's not obvious from their mail signature who they are.

Any person can think that something expressed by some other person
maybe be stupid, limited, greedy, threathening, dangearous or whatever.
Irony, which I think Mr Pilch expressed earlier, considering measuring
"technical height" may be misunderstood for instance, as irony is very
context dependent.

To keep a sane debate, especially on mailing lists and usenet, I see it
very important that we stick to being persons, representing who we are
and what we stand for.

Anonymous chat lists and such certainly fill some needs for some people
but to make mailing lists a serious debate forum it is essential that
we never forget that we are persons speaking with persons. Mailing
lists have a tendency to make people act more extreme and emotional.

For my own I was debating on a mailing list for a local association 
here one year ago and the cashier there, one time said something bad
about open-source in a very similar provocative style as Mr Smith.
I simply told this person that he will regret this. Later on this person
said something similar but this time even offending. I calmly said that I
don't want to be a member of an association where someone in the board
can express themselves in this way. The person quit, and later on sold his
company as well, and the association was almost extinct for a while as
we had been running on his servers..

Considering Mr Smith I'm very surprised when I heard that he is a famous
writer in a pro software patent magazine. Then I would not expect such
immature offending statements which he had expressed (almost anonymously)
in his mail (but later heard that he have had on his now removed web pages
as well, which of course is OK as long as he can stand for them).

Anyway, I've been working with logics and math for 20 years and I've found
that 
     * the idea about software patents is based upon contradictions

I will later prove that more formally, also with a more thorough explanation
why this is a threat to the whole world.

I want a free world based upon fair business and competition which is
based upon skills and not upon monopoly.

I don't believe in the so called intellectual property and business based
upon this myth, will either fail or be harmful.

A system which is based upon contradictions will not be stable.

Apart from being based upon contradiction, patenting software is from
my perspective insane and will lead to terrible consequences in the long
run. I will elaborate more on this later.

        Roland Orre
        Professional software developer
        Towards a free world without monopolies

PS. I actually have a patent since 12 years considering a method for storing
certain types of information in artificial intelligence systems, but at
that time I did not understood better and was persuaded by my employer.
Sorry for that...


--__--__--

Message: 8
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 09:24:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: l b <pubs@linuxwaves.com>
To: orre@nada.kth.se (Roland Orre), PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>
Cc: patents@liberte.aful.org,
        "Ram'on Garc'ia Fern'andez" <ramon@jl1.quim.ucm.es>,
        <softwarelaw@lawyer.com>
Subject: Re: [Patents] Re: World Intellectual Property Day is April 26, 2001
Reply-To: pubs@linuxwaves.com

I apologize.  You were an unintended recipient.  I cut and paste too many
addresses, and didn't scroll through the whole address window before I sent
it.



--- Roland Orre <orre@nada.kth.se>
> wrote:
>Roland says:
>Somebody calling itself "l b <pubs@linuxwaves.com>" obviously has
>unsubscribed to some list by telling us:
>> Mr. Pilch,
>> 
>> I have unsubscribed from this list.
>> 
>> Good luck with your pissing contest.
>
>Roland continues:
>As this person obviously used "BCC" or some other anonymous way of
>forwarding the list, whichever it was, I got the message from somewhere,
>I forward this reply to patents@liberte.aful.org and some of the
>other lists which I found to be the most likely recipients, from my own
>perspective.
>
>I think it is a good advice to anyone speaking in circumstances like
>these that they sign whatever they write with their full name if
>it's not obvious from their mail signature who they are.
>
>Any person can think that something expressed by some other person
>maybe be stupid, limited, greedy, threathening, dangearous or whatever.
>Irony, which I think Mr Pilch expressed earlier, considering measuring
>"technical height" may be misunderstood for instance, as irony is very
>context dependent.
>
>To keep a sane debate, especially on mailing lists and usenet, I see it
>very important that we stick to being persons, representing who we are
>and what we stand for.
>
>Anonymous chat lists and such certainly fill some needs for some people
>but to make mailing lists a serious debate forum it is essential that
>we never forget that we are persons speaking with persons. Mailing
>lists have a tendency to make people act more extreme and emotional.
>
>For my own I was debating on a mailing list for a local association 
>here one year ago and the cashier there, one time said something bad
>about open-source in a very similar provocative style as Mr Smith.
>I simply told this person that he will regret this. Later on this person
>said something similar but this time even offending. I calmly said that I
>don't want to be a member of an association where someone in the board
>can express themselves in this way. The person quit, and later on sold his
>company as well, and the association was almost extinct for a while as
>we had been running on his servers..
>
>Considering Mr Smith I'm very surprised when I heard that he is a famous
>writer in a pro software patent magazine. Then I would not expect such
>immature offending statements which he had expressed (almost anonymously)
>in his mail (but later heard that he have had on his now removed web pages
>as well, which of course is OK as long as he can stand for them).
>
>Anyway, I've been working with logics and math for 20 years and I've found
>that 
>     * the idea about software patents is based upon contradictions
>
>I will later prove that more formally, also with a more thorough
explanation
>why this is a threat to the whole world.
>
>I want a free world based upon fair business and competition which is
>based upon skills and not upon monopoly.
>
>I don't believe in the so called intellectual property and business based
>upon this myth, will either fail or be harmful.
>
>A system which is based upon contradictions will not be stable.
>
>Apart from being based upon contradiction, patenting software is from
>my perspective insane and will lead to terrible consequences in the long
>run. I will elaborate more on this later.
>
>       Roland Orre
>       Professional software developer
>       Towards a free world without monopolies
>
>PS. I actually have a patent since 12 years considering a method for
storing
>certain types of information in artificial intelligence systems, but at
>that time I did not understood better and was persuaded by my employer.
>Sorry for that...

_____________________________________________________________
Get your spam-free, Linux email now --> http://www.LinuxWaves.com
Join Linux discussions --> http://Community.LinuxWaves.com



--__--__--

_______________________________________________
Patents maillist  -  Patents@liberte.aful.org
http://liberte.aful.org/mailman/listinfo/patents


End of Patents Digest