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

[Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>]

    > WIPO is pushing for policies that attack our freedom, but they are
    > very general and abstract.

      It is through WIPO that the United States trade delegation (primarily,
    but there are others such as the UK) is seeking to impose the DMCA
    interpretation of copyright reform, and the unlimited patentability
    interpretation of patent reform.  I don't see how this is abstract:  this
    is pretty fundamental to our problems.

The DMCA is general and abstract: it does not require the public to do
business with a specific list of companies for a specific task.  Most
laws are general and abstract in this sense.

I contrast this with support for a specific standard covered by
specific patents owned by specific companies.

When I say that something is general and abstract, that does not mean
it is harmless or that we should not try to fight it.  That is not the
point.  The point is that the specific requirement to do business with
a particular company ought to scandalise some people who won't agree
with us on the general patent issue or the general DMCA issue.  Let's
look for ways to make use of this.