I guess you have to be too stupid or too evil not to understand this brilliant speach. Only corrupt and evil politicians want to restrict our liberty in such a way.
Jose_X
2009-04-17 05:10:52
Well developed and clever Beethoven analogy.
That is the sort of argument I hope we see one day given before the Supreme Court of the US on way to having effectively all software patents declared unconstitutional.
Jose_X
2009-04-17 05:58:26
The invention and refinement of *software + updatable hardware + the Internet* means that a huge number of products or uses now become accessible to many and createable without an initial undertaking of huge capital outlays. Thus the past questionable worth of patents to encourage risky and costly undertakings now become unquestionably a hindrance if invoked on software.
Do not legislate *ideas* into a *limited resource* to be put under the exclusive control of the first to file the patents. This stumps growth in a major way. This most clearly does not promote the progress of science and useful arts. If access to huge amounts of money and costly production machines and long periods of time is not an obstacle to dissemination of the invention and recovery of the huge investments, then monopolies don't belong. People should be free to think, create works in good faith, share those creations with others, and have these others be able to use those creations.
Jose_X
2009-04-17 06:01:38
Reverse Robin Hood: steal from everyone to give to the few.
You own 100 patents! Wow, now you have 100 ideas you can use ..and only 5 million that you can't because others "own" them.
Software patents are unconstitutional. Please write to your elected officials. Tell them you want the ability to think freely and to create things freely from such thoughts.
Say no to Intellectual Ptheft, to the legislating of ideas into limited resources.
HTTPS is becoming little but a transport layer for Chrome-like browsers, i.e. proprietary things with DRM and perhaps attestation (which means you cannot modify them; you'd get blocked for trying)
it's not censorship when the thing you are censoring [sic] is itself a censorship powerhouse operated by a foreign and hostile nation (or oligarchs of Musk's nature)
Comments
Florin Braescu
2009-04-21 15:54:07
Jose_X
2009-04-17 05:10:52
That is the sort of argument I hope we see one day given before the Supreme Court of the US on way to having effectively all software patents declared unconstitutional.
Jose_X
2009-04-17 05:58:26
Do not legislate *ideas* into a *limited resource* to be put under the exclusive control of the first to file the patents. This stumps growth in a major way. This most clearly does not promote the progress of science and useful arts. If access to huge amounts of money and costly production machines and long periods of time is not an obstacle to dissemination of the invention and recovery of the huge investments, then monopolies don't belong. People should be free to think, create works in good faith, share those creations with others, and have these others be able to use those creations.
Jose_X
2009-04-17 06:01:38
You own 100 patents! Wow, now you have 100 ideas you can use ..and only 5 million that you can't because others "own" them.
Software patents are unconstitutional. Please write to your elected officials. Tell them you want the ability to think freely and to create things freely from such thoughts.
Say no to Intellectual Ptheft, to the legislating of ideas into limited resources.