Re: [fsl-discuss] Re: [Patents] The politics of software over-protection -- moving forward..

[Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>]

    Richard, by "harmless" I can assume you also mean "useless",

When I said "harmless", I meant "harmless", as in "not dangerous to
anyone."

I would not say that software patents are "useless" or "useful",
because both of those terms embody an assumption that (as you know) I
do not agree with.  It would be like asking how useful SARS is.  A
software patent can only harm; what may vary is the amount.

                                              Since you are equating such a
    narrowly scoped software patent with software copyright,

I do not equate them.  A software patent which covered the whole of a
single program would be much narrower than a copyright.

                                                             can I assume
    you thus believe that software copyright for a computer program is
    also "harmless" and "useless" in offering no real exclusionary
    protection?

I will not describe either copyrights or patents as "protection"
because of the bias inherent in that term.  However, I think software
copyright is quite effective for the job I use it for.


All in all, you don't seem to be doing a good job of stating my views.
I suggest you leave that to me, and stick to stating your own views.