[Fsfe-ie] Use FSFE swpat letter?

Seth Johnson seth.johnson at realmeasures.dyndns.org
Fri Sep 10 14:08:15 CEST 2004

Seth Johnson wrote:
> In fact, I think several things should be stated strongly right
> at the juncture, that usually people evade.  I think now is the
> right time to register the "you can't patent abstraction" point,
> so that's in the mix for subsequent legislative discourse -- and
> what's more, it needs to be stated directly that patenting
> abstract rules is not to be allowed, *even for newly discovered,
> breakthrough algorithms* -- just as is the case for scientific
> laws/theory.

I incorporated this point in my response to John Gray, the patent
attorney who wrote the pro-swpat article at out-law.com:

This is a point that just needs to be stated.  It's not
necessarily one that wins in discourse, except at the final
juncture -- but it's essential to register it, so that you can
refer back to it for the future, when it's an important principle
that should be applied in policymaking.

Jonas Maebe also posted a comment to Mr. Gray:



DRM is Theft!  We are the Stakeholders!

New Yorkers for Fair Use

[CC] Counter-copyright: http://realmeasures.dyndns.org/cc

I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or
distribution of this incidentally recorded communication. 
Original authorship should be attributed reasonably, but only so
far as such an expectation might hold for usual practice in
ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim of
exclusive rights.

More information about the FSFE-IE mailing list