Re: [Patents] newsscan: Software patent limits 'go too far'

[Jean-Baptiste Soufron <jbsoufron@free.fr>]

> Another great punch in democracy, it seems.

Not really, democracy is legislative, judicial and executive powers
balancing each other. It's normal that they change rules from one to
another. 

> The text means something. Only comprehension impaired people need an
> interpretation.

Even a simple text can have many different interprations.

> And as it seems there are many people in the law business that need an
> interpretation, the interpretation is :
> 
> The political source of the law has made a special rule to explain
> that software patents is a special case.
> Interpreting this as if there is no special case is BAD.

Yes but the political source of the law also created an exception so
that inventions implementing a software could still be patented. The
problem is that this exception became wider and wider as the text was
not precise enough and as there were no consensus about it in the
society. 
 
> Moreover, even if that special case did not exist in the first place
> (and it exists), we now have sufficient data and studies to show that
> it should exist. Period.

I agree. The consensus is growing! 

That's much more important than changing the text. 

> > Plus, it does not look like everybody agrees. There are also
> > questions raised by people afraid if there is no software patents.
> > For example, why is it better to let them software be free when
> > people who live from patented softwares could lose their jobs?
> 
> Don't worry, you will find other cases to bring in courts.

I don't care much about bringing cases to court. I just mean that law is
much more made by courts than by parliaments. Parliaments vote the
budget but they don't really create law, they vote it but everything
else is left to the court. Law is a dynamic process that evolves with
time and so on... Please just believe me on that :-)
 
> I admit that translating thoughts in unambigous term in a loose
> langage is much more difficult than translating it in a formal langage
> such as computer langages, but remember you're talking to
> professionals of this kind of exercices.

lol... 

Try to put divorce into a formal language and let's look at what will
happen :-)
Don't forget you're talking to professionnals of this kind of
exercises... :-)