Comments on: Patents Roundup: Bilski Revisited, FFII Seems Confused, EU Seemingly Hijacked by Large Corporations http://techrights.org/2009/08/31/hijacked-by-large-corps/ Free Software Sentry – watching and reporting maneuvers of those threatened by software freedom Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:00:35 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2009/08/31/hijacked-by-large-corps/comment-page-1/#comment-73019 Roy Schestowitz Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:30:38 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/?p=17590#comment-73019 rbakels, I've removed the document. My interpretation of the document still stands (I regret my wording though), but if you're open to debate then you can make sure it omits pro-software patents rhetoric, however subtle this may be. It would be wasteful to throw away this rare In Re Bilski opportunity because IBM, for instance, has been far from helpful. I thought that FFII was as stubborn as it gets on this issue (swpats, not bm pats). Best regards. rbakels,

I’ve removed the document. My interpretation of the document still stands (I regret my wording though), but if you’re open to debate then you can make sure it omits pro-software patents rhetoric, however subtle this may be. It would be wasteful to throw away this rare In Re Bilski opportunity because IBM, for instance, has been far from helpful. I thought that FFII was as stubborn as it gets on this issue (swpats, not bm pats).

Best regards.

]]> By: rbakels http://techrights.org/2009/08/31/hijacked-by-large-corps/comment-page-1/#comment-72972 rbakels Mon, 31 Aug 2009 23:27:41 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/?p=17590#comment-72972 Would you please remove the draft "amicus brief" for the Bilski case immediately? Being a draft, it is a preliminary text. I have circulated the text in a closed group, obviously not intended for publication. Apparently someone who was not satisfied by my draft text chose to leak it to you, instead of passing suggestions for text improvement to me. For you, it was clear that the draft was not intended for publication. If you have not removed the text by tomorrow (1/9) afternoon, I will take legal (criminal) action, either on the basis of copyright or on the basis of fencing. I appreciate that you are strongly opposed against software patents, but it does not help the cause to break the basis norms of decency and to try to defame me - instead of proposing a text improvement. Incidentally, anyone familiar with American law will confirm what I said - but you choose to "kill the messenger". Would you please remove the draft “amicus brief” for the Bilski case immediately? Being a draft, it is a preliminary text. I have circulated the text in a closed group, obviously not intended for publication. Apparently someone who was not satisfied by my draft text chose to leak it to you, instead of passing suggestions for text improvement to me.
For you, it was clear that the draft was not intended for publication. If you have not removed the text by tomorrow (1/9) afternoon, I will take legal (criminal) action, either on the basis of copyright or on the basis of fencing.
I appreciate that you are strongly opposed against software patents, but it does not help the cause to break the basis norms of decency and to try to defame me – instead of proposing a text improvement.
Incidentally, anyone familiar with American law will confirm what I said – but you choose to “kill the messenger”.

]]>