Re: [Patents] pooling patents, version 2

[riel@nl.linux.org]

On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, Simo Sorce wrote:

> You asked for it! :-)

And I'm still waiting for ideas... ;)

> First a note: talking of IP (Intellectual Property) is wrong imho, and
> is the first symptom of you falling in the proswpat net,

Agreed, IP is a wrong term.  However, I haven't found an alternative
wording yet; maybe it is time we came up with an alternative word
that covers patents, copyright and the whole field covered by IP,
but that doesn't leave the false suggestion of ownership.

> Now what I really think is that your idea is wrong for few reasons:
>
> 1. by accepting to play the game you admit you failed and you accept the
> swpat idea.

You can't win if you don't play.  In Europe there is still a chance
to save the economy from software patents, but in the USA and Japan
there really is no other choice but to play.  The global market
means that even European companies will have to play, because some
of their (potential) clients are in the USA and/or Japan.

Btw, note that "playing the game" doesn't necessarily mean agreeing
with the other players. Just look at the position of the GPL in the
copyright game.

> 2. as the current proposal, you fail the most important thing: defend
> free software as I will explain:

I'm still waiting for your proposal on how to do things better.

Your criticism would have been helpful if I had a solution for
the points you've come up with, but as it is now I don't have
a solution yet.  Even random braindumps that point in the general
direction of a solution are welcome, since they might inspire
somebody into finding a solution.

kind regards,

Rik
-- 
Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH".
http://www.surriel.com/         http://guru.conectiva.com/
Current spamtrap:  <a 
href=mailto:"october@surriel.com";>october@surriel.com</a>