http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/indprop/softpatanalyse.htm
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/jk-06.08.01-002/
What can we still do against software patents if the EU is not democratic?
Max Moritz Sievers wrote:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/indprop/softpatanalyse.htm
so they ask for comment and then unsatisfied by the results (largely against software patentability) they group most of the comments against patents under the name Open Source lobbyst and claim they does not count so much!
I'm disgusted.
What can we still do against software patents if the EU is not democratic?
from the paper:
"Major players should resist the temptation to aggressively exploit opportunistic patents such as those covering hyperlinks"...
</no comments>
On Wed, 08 Aug 2001, Simo Sorce wrote:
Max Moritz Sievers wrote:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/indprop/softpatanalyse.htm
so they ask for comment and then unsatisfied by the results (largely against software patentability) they group most of the comments against patents under the name Open Source lobbyst and claim they does not count so much!
I'm disgusted.
Okay I read the first 8 pages, and overall I liked it. I thought the wording in places was a dodgy, but otherwise it was a good attempt at summing up everyones views.
They have obviously tried to keep it impartial, and aren't 'unsatisfied by the results' - just trying in their own eyes to make it fair. If you disagree, fair enough - and like it says, the eventual weighting will be done by politcs.
If it was the other way round, and 90% companies for patents, you'd be saying how you think the 10%-against should be weighted more etc..
weighting is always necessary, even if it sounds horrible.
Well.. yes anyway.
regards JohnFlux
What can we still do against software patents if the EU is not democratic?
from the paper:
"Major players should resist the temptation to aggressively exploit opportunistic patents such as those covering hyperlinks"...
</no comments>
-- Simo Sorce
Una scelta di liberta': Software Libero. A choice of freedom: Free Software. http://www.softwarelibero.it _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@fsfeurope.org http://mailman.fsfeurope.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discussion
On Wednesday 08 August 2001 18:37, you wrote:
They have obviously tried to keep it impartial, and aren't 'unsatisfied by the results' - just trying in their own eyes to make it fair. If you disagree, fair enough - and like it says, the eventual weighting will be done by politcs.
No, weighting is undemocratic. They think the "Open Sourcers" are just extremists and spinners and so their votes shouldn't count. This is the purpose of the "Micro$oft"-Paragraph where they try to make the EuroLinux-Petition implausible. I don't know WTF Microsoft has to do with this case (see, I can write "Microsoft" with "s").
To show you the injustice I translate http://www.heise.de/newsticker/forum/go.shtml?tres=1&msg=145&g=20010... "We recieved majorly declining statements (91% against) to the draft bill 'reintroduction of slavery`. But a large proportion of this group was prolatarians - mostly even with dark skin. On the other hand 54% of the big landowners voted for the reintroduction of slavery. We advise the commission to orientate themselfes on the economic power of the participants." Bernd Paysan (bernd.paysan@gmx.de)
If it was the other way round, and 90% companies for patents, you'd be saying how you think the 10%-against should be weighted more etc..
I wouldn't. In a democratic system everyone has exactly _one_ vote. There is no "weigthing". In the EU just money reigns. The only thing that is missing in the analysis are the bank statements of the authors.
/MMS
Hi all.
MMS wrote:
I wouldn't. In a democratic system everyone has exactly _one_ vote. There is no "weigthing".
On the other hand, this is not a democratic vote, nor it is a serious research made on a carefully selected sample of the population. I don't think banning the document as "undemocratic" is fair.
So, while I disagree on several points, I understand their weigthing. In my mind, I hear them saying: "most people who replied followed the open-source tam-tam, something that doesn't exist in other cultural environments".
Actually, they explicitly write:
Many of the individual responses in the Eurolinux "petition" had obviously been influenced by the contents of the e-mail from Eurolinux.
I didn't yet read carefully the report, but I fear it has some more subtle errors.
For example this is immediately apparent from the report:
Pie charts: Opponents of Software Patents [...] SME 16% [...] Supporters of S/W related Patents [...] SME 13% [...]
The differences between the two groups are stark. It is interesting, however, to note that the proportion of SMEs is similar in each case.
This is very wrong reasoning, in my opinion. They convey the idea that SME's are equally for and against swpats; the real figure is that the former is a huge numbers of SME's and the latter is a few of them.
/alessandro
Simo Sorce simo.sorce@tiscalinet.it schrieb/wrote:
"Major players should resist the temptation to aggressively exploit opportunistic patents such as those covering hyperlinks"...
Interestinly, not:
"Care should be taken not to allow registration of opportunistic patens such as those covering hyperlinks"
Claus
Claus Färber wrote:
Simo Sorce simo.sorce@tiscalinet.it schrieb/wrote:
"Major players should resist the temptation to aggressively exploit opportunistic patents such as those covering hyperlinks"...
Interestinly, not:
"Care should be taken not to allow registration of opportunistic patens such as those covering hyperlinks"
Well why you have to be so rigid? You do not trust these lovely multinational companies? NO? You little black lobbyst!