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

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

On Wed, Apr 23, 2003 at 10:41:24AM -0400, Russell McOrmond wrote:
> 
> > Well, a patent is not much better just because you use it defensively:
> > a- it can be used offensively later when budgets go low or anything
> 
>   This is why the non-revocable RF license. This IBM representative didn't
> get this either.  He kept asking me to quote any time IBM aggressively
> defended a patent, and I told him that this was not relevant.  A
> benevolent dictator is still a dictator, and can not be supported.

Wrong answer IMHO

The isuue is not that IBM applies for patents, or uses them wisely,
defensively or agressively. The issue is that IBM supports the
extension of patenting to software, thus enabling players to use them
agressively (even if IBM does not).

  The issue is not how they play the game (and in business, agrssive
playing is the normal rule), but in the choosing of the rules by which
the game will be played.

Bernard
  

-- 
         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