On 2004-09-21 10:21:58 +0100 Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, Sep 20, 2004 at 03:02:49PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
It is bad patent law which favours patent owners. It is fine to use
copyright licences to "correct" copyright law, but using copyright
licences
to "correct" non-copyright law - be it patent law, gun control law
or
nuclear technology laws - is not.
Why? What freedoms does this protect?
Respectively: the freedom to prosecute with and defend yourself
against patent accusations; the freedom to bear arms; and the freedom
to use nuclear technology. Of course, not all jurisdictions allow
those freedoms, but that's determined by laws, not by copyright
licences.
Why should copyright not be used
to protect free software from patent abuse, just as it's used to
protect
against "software hoarding"?
Mainly because most possible uses have unpleasant side-effects in some
cases. "Software hoarding" is a description of a copyright-based
problem, if you are referring to rms's "Why Software Should Be Free".
It seems just to use copyright to solve it. Why should we use
copyright against patent law, instead of encouraging patent-afflicted
developers to find ways to use patenting against itself?
Similarly, why should copyright not be used to protect free software
use from gun abuse and nuclear technology abuse?
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and not of any group I know
Creative copyleft computing - http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
LinuxExpo.org.uk village 6+7 Oct http://www.affs.org.uk