[Patents] Re: Re: American Inventor Coalition / was Re: Software and

[kodama@netcourrier.com (kodama@netcourrier.com)]

>
>> It is the second time you call members to ignore my mails. But in
>> the name of what ? Is it your understand of liberty ?
>Although your level of arguing has meanwhile improved somewhat, it is
>still not good enough to justify your anonymity.

Anonymity. Well, ok, I may suppose this is a problem for you. But on the o=
ther hand, will a name change the way to answer ?
I do not think so.

So please, forgive me to keep being anonymous for this last mail.


>I am getting private flames and even threats from patent advocates > all

I am sorry to hear that =21 (really, there is no irony).
I do not accept this way of resolving problems (flames, threats, refusing =
other liberty of expression..), whether they are coming from one party or =
another.

But I see no connection with my behaviour, and I see no practical means to=
 threat you.


>community.  On this list and others, we have not yet had a single
>person arguing in favor of software patents in an fair way, but only
>people who kept iterating the same old long-refuted statements,

I see your position, and I find it normal (=3D usual) on the internet.

On the other hand, what I have seen of the anti-sw patent communauty durin=
g these few days here is =22people unable to arguing in a fair way, withou=
t iterating the same old long-discussed arguments, and threating/inciting =
members to ignore contrevering posting=22.
If I was wondering (and I was =21) about the aims and faiths of your party=
, I am not anymore =21

>apparently hoping to confuse some unexperienced readers, to waste our
>time or to lure us into impolite reactions and then spread some bad
>rumors about us.

Yes. I understand that you may be reluctant for open-discussion with the o=
ther party. But on the other hand, your overal behaviour (mainly the behav=
iour of M. Lang, but you seem to act on his shadow) will not incite me (an=
d some other readers) to widespread good opinions of your communauty.

And I am not happy about this, because I believe in open source software, =
and do not want it to be assimilited to the epidermic reactions I have rea=
d here.


>I have continued to respond to Greg, because I know who he is and I

So, may I ask you about the purpose of this forum ?
Is just to talk among people having the same opinion, or well-know and adm=
itted people ?

I have more and more the feeling of a closed sect, even if this world is a=
 tough one...



>use the time to work on a FAQ than respond to your mails.  I know > that =
I myself often fail to heed this advice.

I support the idea of the FAQ.
If oneday you manage to finish it, please inform me. =

(If you do not bother that I forward it to people of the other party (comp=
any managements, associations..)

Thanks to have taken time to answer and for the tone of your mail
S.C.




>

----- La messagerie itin=E9rante sans abonnement NetCourrier -----
Web: www.netcourrier.com - Minitel : 3615 NETCOURRIER
T=E9l=E9phone: 08 36 69 00 21