Ben, you said you are applying the 'Divide and Conquer' approach to
patents (since patents are probably also a real problem in other
industries). If software patents as a whole is too large a chunk,
perhaps dividing out free software as the first step will be easier? I
don't know the
On 12/02/12 21:32, Bianca Gibson wrote:
Rather than going off guesswork I think the proportion of people interested
in ending software patents that have a soft spot for FS would need to be
investigated before any action was taken based on it. How do we know it's
not just the active and visible
On 12 February 2012 22:54, Adam Bolte abo...@systemsaviour.com wrote:
My understanding is that we're *already* going off guesswork. We're
guessing that going against software patents completely is a better
approach to any of the alternatives, without having consulted with any
legal experts.
Sorry, it's getting confusing as it seems this list is forking a lot --
some of the replies are going to endsoftwarepatents.org and others aren't.
For simplicity (and since I have no idea who is on that other list or how
big it is), I'll just keep my reply within MFSIG.
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at
On Mon, 13 Feb 2012, Matt Giuca matt.gi...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not trying to incite flaming. The reason I said that it transforms it
is that at least in today's environment, all free software developers (GPL
and BSD-like) know to avoid patents wherever possible. I'm not going to
write a
On 12/02/12 14:42, Ben Sturmfels wrote:
On 12/02/12 12:05, Matt Giuca wrote:
I thought that there was a really great idea from a commenter at the end
of your talk whereby free software would be considered by law 'in the
public interest' and becomes except from applying to patent lawsuits
at
