Re: [Patents] US patent reform strategy inaugurated by myths & lies

[PILCH Hartmut <phm@a2e.de>]

> > Can we please separate the discussion  between what do you think
> > would be good and what do you think is likely?.

> Actually they are interdependant.

...

> To answer your question, my opinion is that patents on SW (and SW
> *only*) are bad. I also see that in the future with tech advance, HW
> will take some role of SW, but I think that pantents on HW are
> necessary anyway. I also think that chances to avoid SW patenting are
> pretty slim, especially with a bold approach.

Hardware is not patentable.
Technical inventions are.
Even patents on technical inventions are not necessary, as has been shown
by a lot of economic treatises.  But they have more merits than patents on
rules of organisation and calculation (which don't become much better
by being implemented in hardware).

Your answer to the question "what would be good?" is unclear and
unreasoned.

Your answer to the question "what is likely?" is even more groundless.

In general, I think the discussion about the appropriate political tactics
should be left to the tacticians of whatever group is engaging in a
political game.

When we are not confident that we are working for the same goal, there is
no point in discussing tactics.

> > And during inquisition you could find sinners and heretic books
> > underground, but that does not justify inquisition. It is
> > irresponsible to let a law pass that illegalise your actions
> > just because you think you won't be caught.
>
> Correct,  but I simply haven't said that: only an evidence that
> practical effect are little.

You said above that patents won't have that much of an effect because
companies only litigate when the cost/effect ratio is good and it often
won't be good in Europe.  You said this as part of an effort to discourage
our campaigning.

> > MS  can't do all they want, that's why their BSA pushes
> > Europe to give them patens so they can do what they want.
>
> I can't understand here. The fact that .NET is partly public
> has nothing to do with BSA. It's a political choice that MS
> was forced to do by the market. BSA is a lobby that push
> tougher protection on SW copy protection, basically (at
> least in Italy).

You may not have read

        http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/eubsa-swpat0202/

> > Market is no judge, and only resembles Justice in that it is
> > blindfolded.
>
> You have products A and B that compete each other for
> the same market share. After one year you see how many
> As and Bs were sold, and you see what the market has
> chosen. This is commonly referred as market judgement".
> It's not blindfolded, at least I don't think that you buy
> software at your local store blindfolded.
> Your statement (if I have understood it in the correct
> light) is a nonsense.

Software doesn't just win on its merits in an environment where
proprietary structures make sure that there is no level playing field.
Also for other reasons, the above "market economy" theory is mainly for
the schoolbook.  Not quite pointless, but far from real experience.

> > No. This is not only the world we live in, it is the world we make with
> > our actions. If you don't like it, then change it. Since you're not
> > trying to change it, I guess you like it.
>
> You can stop people starvation in Africa? And AIDS death toll?
> Drugs? Fake business papers like Enron? Countless of other
> things? You like them all? I don't believe that you have maked
> something against Enron affair. Not because I think you are
> stupid, but simply because we cannot do everything and personally
> I am not qualified to make something in things like Enron.
> But I *not* like Enron case.
> Another nonsense statement.

We are doing nothing about AIDS on this mailing list.  But we are also not
propagating some theory that all anti AIDS efforts are pointless.

I still must conclude that you like software patents.

Recognise the tree by its fruits, as the Bible says.

-- 
Hartmut Pilch, FFII & Eurolinux Alliance              tel. +49-89-12789608
Protecting Innovation against Patent Inflation       http://swpat.ffii.org/
120,000 signatures against software patents      http://www.noepatents.org/