Fw: [Patents] French high level civil servant warns about spwatdanger

["Jean-Bernard CONDAT" <condat@chrystol.com>]

Yes, as a French IP specialist, I can certify that Mr. Yolin have a great
important in the IT area in france. Perhaps you don't understand the
copyright (french version of ©) european law. It's extremely different of
the american point-of-view.

Regards,

Jean-Bernard CONDAT
Chrystol: first IP insurance for all {software) patents
condat@chrystol.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rui Miguel Seabra" <rms@1407.org>
To: "Brevets" <patents@aful.org>
Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 10:53 PM
Subject: Re: [Patents] French high level civil servant warns about
spwatdanger

On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 18:22, Gregory Aharonian wrote:
> If Mr. Yolin understood anything about the SCO/IBM case, or IP law in
> general, we would have stated something more accurate like:
>  .... that COPYRIGHTS and patents were created to induce
>         .... innovation but that they have been diverted to
>         .... create minefields and neutralize "embarassing"
>         .... competitors.  Now COPYRIGHT AND patent holders send
>         .... lawyers when the competitors is looking for funds and
>         .... customers.

Actually, isn't the SCO vs IBM case a matter of contractual rights that
alledgedly have been broken by IBM? As in, it's not a matter of
Copyright nor Patent law?

Maybe the Mr. Yolin read only some of the dreadfully confusing SCO many
alegations (which I might remind that some of them even seem to change
over time) as for instance when they threatened to sue Linus Torvalds
for patent infringement...

Who's confused and failing to understand something?

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
On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 18:22, Gregory Aharonian wrote:
> If Mr. Yolin understood anything about the SCO/IBM case, or IP law in
> general, we would have stated something more accurate like:
>       .... that COPYRIGHTS and patents were created to induce
>         .... innovation but that they have been diverted to 
>         .... create minefields and neutralize "embarassing"
>         .... competitors.  Now COPYRIGHT AND patent holders send
>         .... lawyers when the competitors is looking for funds and
>         .... customers.

Actually, isn't the SCO vs IBM case a matter of contractual rights that
alledgedly have been broken by IBM? As in, it's not a matter of
Copyright nor Patent law?

Maybe the Mr. Yolin read only some of the dreadfully confusing SCO many
alegations (which I might remind that some of them even seem to change
over time) as for instance when they threatened to sue Linus Torvalds
for patent infringement...

Who's confused and failing to understand something?

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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Binary data