Re: [Patents] Re: IBM, Microsoft, BEA Snub W3C

[Rui Miguel Seabra <rms@1407.org>]

On Wed, 2003-04-30 at 14:33, Russell McOrmond wrote:
> On 30 Apr 2003, Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:
> 
> > Not at the supporting of ebXML? <mode type="sarcasm">Of course not, it's
> > only THE United Nations officially endorsing and supporting the private
> > profit of a "couple" of big companies, AFAICT</mode>.
> 
>   Sarcasm aside, you can change "couple" to "a small number" and be
> talking about software patent/unlimited patentability and DMCA-style
> copyright reform rather than the (relatively unimportant) ebXML 
> non-free/libre standard.
>   The ebXML non-free/libre problem is an 'effect' of poor United Nations
> member public policy, not the problem itself.

Well, more or less. ebXML might be a subclass of a problem (in OO
terms).

Can I make a suggestion though? Use unavailability, as in:

  The problem of the unavailability of ebXML is an 'effect' of poor
United Nations member public policy, not the problem itself.

Hugs, Rui
-- 
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
-- 
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part