[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]

(074db819ec% subtitle %074db819ec)


(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)chronological(074db819ec% END %074db819ec) (074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Thread(074db819ec% END %074db819ec) 
(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec)
(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Reply to sender(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) (074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)to list(074db819ec%END%074db819ec)

(074db819ec% IF user.email == 'seth.johnson@RealMeasures.dyndns.org' || is_owner %074db819ec) (074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)


LOL

I never use the term "CII patents," though I use the term "CII
Directive" despite the fact that the actual name of the thing is
"Directive on the Patentability of Computer-Implemented
Inventions."  :-)

You're mouthing general principles to a pretty careful and
skilled practitioner.  It's a useless exercise.  I'd hate to
actually make a mistake!  The certainly important thing, that we
all see clearly, is to be sure to emphasize the contradiction
between the title and what the Directive accomplishes.


Seth



Florian Mueller wrote:
> 
> We should use the term "software patents" instead of "CII patents" whenever
> and wherever we can, which is in almost 100% of all cases.  We should reject
> the name by consistently and persistently saying "software patents" because
> the more people do that, the better our opponents realize that the
> euphemism-and-denial strategy doesn't work.

-- 

[CC] Counter-copyright: http://realmeasures.dyndns.org/cc

I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or
distribution of this incidentally recorded communication. 
Original authorship should be attributed reasonably, but only so
far as such an expectation might hold for usual practice in
ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim of
exclusive rights.





(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.

(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)