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

[Bernard Lang <Bernard.Lang@inria.fr> (Bernard Lang)]

General comment:

  we should stop replying to individual arguments ... it is only a
waste of time, and leads to the situation we see now, when one
individual believe he has the right to restart the whole discussion
process anew for his personnal benefit (or else we are a sect refusing
discussion).

   Reply should just be references to existing (evolving) documents or
a FAQ.

  The interest of this list is that it does offer interesting views
and arguments, and not just from one side.

   But I (and we) cannot afford the time to read stuff that has
already been rehashed countless times, just because some newcomer
thinks he has the right theory of the universe, and that we never
heard it before.
   Not to metion the fact that he might be deliberately trying to
waste our time, or lure us into committing a mistake, which can be
quoted later on.

Bernard Lang
Cosmo-Planetary Messiah


On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 05:22:34PM +0200, kodama@netcourrier.com wrote:

> On the other hand, what I have seen of the anti-sw patent communauty
> during these few days here is "people unable to arguing in a fair
> way, without iterating the same old long-discussed arguments, and
> threating/inciting members to ignore contrevering posting".  If I
> was wondering (and I was !) about the aims and faiths of your party,
> I am not anymore !

We have clearly expressed our views by writing papers, in English,
French and other languages.

   I do not see that we have to waste our time on this list by writing
again for the benefit of one individual, too lazy to look at existing
documents, what is already written.

   A basic rule of any forum or newsgroup is to read some information
before you start voicing opinions.
  None of your arguments is new. Ignorance is no excuse since the
information is available.  So you are only wasting the time of people
on this list ... and obviously trying to discredit us, when we point
out that we have better things to do than listen and reply to you.

   If you have something original to say, write a paper in English or
French. 

> >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.

which is precisely what you are doing in this message.
 
If you signed your messages, or gave us some adequate reason why you
dont, I would have been willing to believe in your good faith.  I know
enough IP people in various places to question the necessity of such
precautions.

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

as Hartmut said above ... and spread whatever rumor you like ...
(BTW I would be flattered to have Hartmut as a shadow ...)
 
> And I am not happy about this, because I believe in open source
> software,
  how nice !   tell us more ...
> and do not want it to be assimilited to the epidermic
> reactions I have read here.

> 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 admitted
> people ?

we only expect people to be informed, and discuss fairly.

You obviously fail on one criterion, whichever it is.  Other people
opposing us, including from patent offices, have been discussing on
this list without raising problems.


  BTW, and for you information, if I really wanted to shut you out of
this list, I have better technical ways than just telling it openly to
everyone.  I consider it well within my right, and in agreement with
democratics principles, to tell everyone openly what I think of your
contribution and what I consider an appropriate response.


> 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 
> (company managements, associations..)

well, Hartmut forgets all that is already written... and published.

 But since you are interested in informing your management, we can
provide you with a good bibliography.   Just tell us what you want.

We have both English and French.  Long and short.  Technical and non
technical.

But I doubt you management is really interested in public good or
societal issues.  Not that I blame them ... that is not what they are
paid for.
  The decisions belong to policy makers and it is them who should
analyse the issues and make decisions... ignoring the pressure of
lobbies, of all lobbies.

Bernard Lang

PS If interested, I can send you my own paper, not yet on the web to
respect the investment of the publisher (who will eventually put it on
the web)
 Terminal, numéro 84, Enjeux de la brevetabilité du logiciel (B. Lang)
 http://www.terminal.sgdg.org/

-- 
         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