Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.org.eff.talk:9538 misc.int-property:609 comp.unix.bsd:6822 Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property,alt.suit.att-bsdi,comp.unix.bsd Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!ficc!peter From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) Subject: Re: Patents: What they are. What they aren't. Other factors. Message-ID: <id.X18U.D6J@ferranti.com> Organization: Xenix Support, FICC References: <1992Oct15.144359.7019@rwwa.COM> <1992Oct17.015308.29380@pegasus.com> <1992Oct18.085201.22747@fcom.cc.utah.edu> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1992 15:44:56 GMT Lines: 23 In article <1992Oct18.085201.22747@fcom.cc.utah.edu> terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C) writes: > I think it's up to Robert's opponents to quit begging the question (a logical > fallacy) to try to "prove" their view, and give Robert a fair shot at finding > a patent that meets a reasonable definition of "beneficial to society". This is nonsense. I've given a definition a number of times. It's the one on the constitution of the United States. I've asked for examples a number of times, with nothing but hypothetical scenarios in response. Coming up with imaginary opponents who refuse to accept that any patents are valid, or could be beneficial to society, is simply childish. The rate of innovation in the software community is simply amazing, and needs no intervention from government to encourage the creation or publication of new algorithms. If the best defense you can come up with to the contrary position is that I, or we, or some imaginary opponent hasn't defined the phrase "beneficial to society" you've lost at the starting gate. -- Peter da Silva `-_-' Ferranti Intl. Ctls. Corp. 'U` Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012 "Heeft u vandaag al uw wolf geknuffeld?" +1 713 274 5180 "Tjener, denne ret er stadig levende."