adage about:
"The definition of a conservative is a liberal who's been mugged"
and
"The definition of a liberal is a conservative who's been arrested"
Regular people, particularly programmers it seems, love the idea of
everything being free and open, up until the time when it is *their*
intellectual property which is being absconded. As the holder of several
patents, I can attest to how my mindset changed once the first was issued :)
Unfortunately, the average person on the street does not have enough
knowledge to understand how a derivative patent can be issued and it often
looks flippant or random when all the info is not present. Even having been
through the experience of getting one, I *know* I don't understand how the
nuances of patent law works -- so I'm pretty confident that anyone who
doesn't have a patent law degree probably has nothing but opinion to
contribute to the Eolas/MS discussion.
I think it says a lot about how techies are often just out of the business
loop in thinking that IP is a secondary topic. In an era based on
information and what one knows, IP is the *only* currency that holds true
value, and things are simply not as simple as "well Newton invented gravity
so we all owe him a dime each time we drop a hammer". It is the application
of an idea to a new process altogether that makes derivative patents
worthwhile and worth protecting, even if it takes a patent-attorney to
understand the difference.
also someone had said:
"Additionally, I believe that patent enforcement should not be allowed to be
selective."
That's just awful. Patents are about property. If I own a pool why should I
not be allowed to let whoever I wish swim in it? If you have a guest room at
your home, do I have the right to just walk in and use it on any given
night? If you take away fundamental property rights you dissolve any meaning
to achievement.
I'll close on a funny note. I remember an old All In The Family episode
where Archie Bunker says "think about this: equality is unfair!" "What?!?",
says Mike (the Meathead). Archie responds "well what's the purpose of trying
to get ahead all your life if all you're gonna do is end up equal?"
Now that is humorous of course, but it underscores a similar issue here.
Equality is about equal opportunity, not about equal achievement. Patents --
properly issued, that is, but that's a different question -- protect people
who have achieved some intellectual creation which is otherwise not
protected from theft except by the patent. That is why patents are based on
process, not on concept.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Calvin Ward" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Talk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 2:37 PM
Subject: Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
> One can find both the system and the people who take advantage of the
system to be less than honorable. And that opinion has no need to be
influenced by the ethical level of target of the dishonorable behavior.
>
> It is my fervent hope that Eolas not only loses, but has to pay
Microsoft's legal fees and additional damages to cover research for
alternative solutions to an issue that shouldn't exist.
>
> Additionally, I believe that patent enforcement should not be allowed to
be selective.
>
> - Calvin
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Matt Liotta
> To: CF-Talk
> Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 1:52 PM
> Subject: Re: OT (was Re: Macromedia sinks on sales news)
>
>
> > Since there's nothing we can do about it, we just have to use the
> > workaround and hope that Eolas goes belly up.
> >
> Alternatively, you could get mad at the patent system instead and work
> to change that instead of wasting time on the latest company exploiting
> it.
>
> Matt Liotta
> President & CEO
> Montara Software, Inc.
> http://www.MontaraSoftware.com
> (888) 408-0900 x901
>
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
