<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Patents Roundup: Microsoft Sues, Patents Critic Become Nobel Laureate, and More</title>
	<atom:link href="http://techrights.org/2008/11/19/patents-critic-nobel-laureate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://techrights.org/2008/11/19/patents-critic-nobel-laureate/</link>
	<description>Free Software Sentry – watching and reporting maneuvers of those threatened by software freedom</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:00:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roy Schestowitz</title>
		<link>http://techrights.org/2008/11/19/patents-critic-nobel-laureate/comment-page-1/#comment-38004</link>
		<dc:creator>Roy Schestowitz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 20:05:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boycottnovell.com/2008/11/19/patents-critic-nobel-laureate/#comment-38004</guid>
		<description>Another &#039;solution&#039; that legitimises patents is OIN (AKA Maginot line).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another &#8216;solution&#8217; that legitimises patents is OIN (AKA Maginot line).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jose_X</title>
		<link>http://techrights.org/2008/11/19/patents-critic-nobel-laureate/comment-page-1/#comment-38002</link>
		<dc:creator>Jose_X</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:52:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://boycottnovell.com/2008/11/19/patents-critic-nobel-laureate/#comment-38002</guid>
		<description>&gt;&gt; But there is one key difference. Unlike Peer-to-Patent, Article One Partners offers people a financial incentive to donate their time and expertise. &quot;We feel people should be compensated for the value of their information,&quot; Milone said.

I am against higher quality patents, certainly for patents that should not be patents in the first place judging from the pov of benefit/loss equation for society.

That these people are now paying only shows just how much others are trying to get us to work for free to value up their antisocial assets significantly for them. Think about it. You are helping to build a monopoly that will withstand a court challenge. I suspect this will have some legs, however, because it offers an opportunity for regular Jacks/Jills to get a cut of the royalty stream depending on how they negotiate. The USPTO couldn&#039;t do the job (naturally), so now patent writers want to tap into the free market &quot;community&quot; to salvage the integrity of the system.

BTW, the recent groklaw articles covering opinions related to the recent court ruling have a ton of good arguments. Perhaps all FOSS contributors should pour through those comments and consider writing something to their government representatives in support of *no* software patents. In the US, the Obama website invites you to comment on any issue. Look for the technology section. Also write to other reps. Let&#039;s not only have patent trolls lobbying, because they do and will continue to lobby as they stand to gain much at our expense.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt;&gt; But there is one key difference. Unlike Peer-to-Patent, Article One Partners offers people a financial incentive to donate their time and expertise. &#8220;We feel people should be compensated for the value of their information,&#8221; Milone said.</p>
<p>I am against higher quality patents, certainly for patents that should not be patents in the first place judging from the pov of benefit/loss equation for society.</p>
<p>That these people are now paying only shows just how much others are trying to get us to work for free to value up their antisocial assets significantly for them. Think about it. You are helping to build a monopoly that will withstand a court challenge. I suspect this will have some legs, however, because it offers an opportunity for regular Jacks/Jills to get a cut of the royalty stream depending on how they negotiate. The USPTO couldn&#8217;t do the job (naturally), so now patent writers want to tap into the free market &#8220;community&#8221; to salvage the integrity of the system.</p>
<p>BTW, the recent groklaw articles covering opinions related to the recent court ruling have a ton of good arguments. Perhaps all FOSS contributors should pour through those comments and consider writing something to their government representatives in support of *no* software patents. In the US, the Obama website invites you to comment on any issue. Look for the technology section. Also write to other reps. Let&#8217;s not only have patent trolls lobbying, because they do and will continue to lobby as they stand to gain much at our expense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

