> ----- Original message -----
> From: "Dave Neary‎" <[email protected]>
> To: "Randall Arnold‎" <[email protected]>
> cc: "Ryan Abel‎" <[email protected]>, "Rudolf Streif‎"
<[email protected]>, "Community Building and
Infrastructure (discussion list)‎" <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [MeeGo-community] PCWorld: Why Nokia Is in Deep Trouble
With MeeGo (should someone reply to this article?)
> Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2011 09:04:33 +0100
>
>
>Hi,
>
> Randall Arnold wrote:
> > "Intellectual property" may be a poor choice as the standard
> > phrase, but use of the phrase in and of itself should not be a
> > stumbling block to rational discussion. Rather, that would be the
> > context(s) wrapped around it in a given dialog.
>
> It's a poor choice because it covers some completely different things
> (for example, copyright and trademark - we have seen first hand how
> different these things can be - and trade secrets and patents). Only
> patents apply to the protection of an idea, so it seems that you're
> talking about those.
>

I wasn't overly concerned with the basis, just hoping we could ground the
"emotional charge" on the object. �;)

And patents don't protect ideas; they protect the realization or
rendition of an idea.

There is no mechanism for protecting something as ethereal as an idea.
�Thank God.

Randy

--------------------------------------------------------------
Ovi Mail: Making email access easy
http://mail.ovi.com

_______________________________________________
MeeGo-community mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-community

Reply via email to