But the difference between copyright and patents are that patents govern
the *use* or *implementation* of that idea not just dissemination. So
that's why with software being governed by copyright, you can have several
programs that do the same thing. If software becomes governed by patents
instead, then you can't -- even if they were thought of independently.
The people behind sw patents in Europe know full well they are in the
wrong. That's evident in the great lengths they've taken to try to sneak
through such legislation, such as piggy backing it to some fisheries and
agricultural decisions.
The proposal that is before the EP right now technically isn't legal and
should be sent to the cricular file without further discussion. It came
to the EP from the EC which had passed it as an A-item (unanimous,
non-controvesial) on the agenda. However, only items on which no members
object to can be A-items and this was not one of those. Several members
objected so it cannot have been an A-item and must be dealt with properly
instead.
-Lars
Lars Nooden ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Software patents harm all Net-based business, write your MEP:
http://wwwdb.europarl.eu.int/ep6/owa/p_meps2.repartition?ilg=EN
On Mon, 30 May 2005, Eric Hines wrote:
The most critical function of a patent or a copyright is that it allows the
owner (I'll call this person, for now) of the thing--the invention, the
implementation of an idea, etc--to assert ownership of that thing. With that
ownership comes the ability to mandate, for the duration of that ownership,
the dissemination of that thing. For instance, without ownership, the GNU
license would be impossible, because there would be no owner to assert the
requirement for that license to be applied.
Notice I have never said anything about owning ideas. In the US, at least,
owning ideas is explicitly excluded from the patent/copyright process,
however blurred that seems to be getting now. I have an idea for a thing: I
write a book that describes that idea, or I build a better keyboard that is
an implementation of that idea--the book and the keyboard are mine to control
the use of, but the idea remains owned by no one. You can write a different
book describing that same idea, and you can build your own better keyboard
that implements that same idea, so long as its a different implementation
from mine.
Eric Hines
At 05/30/05 12:43, you wrote:
M. Fioretti wrote:
Maybe you meant _software_ or _algorithm_ _only_ patents, not all
possible patents in every field, didn't you?
I used the word "idea" and "idea" is precisely what I mean. Ideas are not
constrained to software. If I draw a painting about a dragon, I should not
be able to prevent you from drawing your own painting about a dragon, even
though that's not an algorithm, or software.
<snip>
I question the general validity of patents. Suppose you design a better
keyboard, so that it's much easier to learn. Should you be granted a
monopoly on making keyboards with that design? I don't think so. You are
free to disagree. We can just agree to disagree on that.
Cheers,
Daniel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Government programs provide enough to keep you alive, but they don't offer
any hope of living your dreams.
--Grim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
