On Fri, 2004-06-04 at 03:01, will ross wrote: > On 3 Jun 2004, at 12:36 AM, Tim Churches wrote: > > > Sure there is little hope for patent reform in the US and thus US > > citizens might as > > well roll over and read a good book... > > cute, but irrelevant. if you want to follow the patent reform debate, > then go hang out on the eff website. > > my point, second attempt: > > [1] the foss process in and of itself disintermediates the patent > system as it is perceived by (and abused by) the patentistas
Not so. FOSS is a) heavily dependent on existing "intellectual property" protection regimes - specifically, copyright. b) FOSS products are just as liable to the threat of or actual legal action over patent infringements as commercial software c) you can't depend on copyright law but then say patent law doesn't matter. Consistent approaches are to i) obrogate Western style "intellectual property" protection regimes altogether - a desirable and possibly viable option for developing countries, as George Monbiot points out or ii) try to reform the existing system. Of course i) can only be done at a national level - it is fruitless and ill-advised for individuals or small groups to act illegally and flout existing laws. > [2] increasing the success of open source solutions reduces the > relevance of outrageous patents How? What is teh logic behind this assertion? > [3] patent "reform" in any country is not immediately relevant > > [a] because patent abuse shenanigans are a sign of creative failure > (and of foss success) Creative impoverishment never stopped any corporation from trampling others. > [b] because in the long cycle strengthening the foss portfolio > builds an unassailable commons Are are saying that the popularity and thus political sway of FOSS will protect it against legal challenges under patent law? FOSS will need to be a LOT more popular than it is now for that to be true. > > [c] see #1 > > will we ever disabuse the patentistas from their fundamental desire to > sue their way to the top? no, their tactics remain valid on a > microeconomic level, it's their strategic dependence upon private > knowledge portfolios we are shredding with an asymmetric foss assault > at a macroeconomic level. FOSS as a force at a macroeconomic level? Now or in the near future? Really? > am i outraged by the disneyfication of global culture? not really, i > have trouble prioritising rage as an appropriate response. > > am i amused by patent madness among the globalisation elite? yes, i am > amused by it. > > microsoft patents the double click? let them, they must be more > desperate than i thought. > > can i stop masses of people who are unable to think for themselves from > behaving like idiots? no, but i can contribute towards a long term > solution by banding together with reasonable people who actually think > for a change, about a change, and who build the change. > > if at the end of the day fools remain in hot pursuit of absurd power > monopolies, tell me how this is different from any other day in the > past, say, few thousand years? Those are valid individualist responses to the situation. Forgive some of us if our natural responses are more political. > meanwhile, weber's book is excellent. here's a couple of decent quotes: > > "Property in open source is configured around the right to distribute, > not the right to exclude. ... Is it possible to build a working > economic system around the core notion of property rights as > distribution?" > > "The open source process has generalizable characteristics, it is a > generic production process, and it can and will spread to other kinds > of production." > > "There is no state of nature on the Internet. Knowledge does not want > to be 'free' (or for that matter, 'owned') more than it wants to be > anything else." Yes, good quotes, but orthogonal to the issue of the slow strangulation of innovation, including FOSS, by software and algorithmic patents. -- Tim C PGP/GnuPG Key 1024D/EAF993D0 available from keyservers everywhere or at http://members.optushome.com.au/tchur/pubkey.asc Key fingerprint = 8C22 BF76 33BA B3B5 1D5B EB37 7891 46A9 EAF9 93D0
