| 1 |
On Thursday 28 August 2003 5:10 am, Luke-Jr wrote: |
| 2 |
> You do realize what patents are, right? |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Yes. My question wasn't about patents (a *system* of IPR protection), but |
| 5 |
about whether or not an individual or organisation should have the *moral* |
| 6 |
right to protect and earn revenue from their IPR. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> This would be like saying just |
| 9 |
> because HP invented remote access first, noone else can invent it |
| 10 |
> independantly. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Well, that *is* how other fields of human endeavour have to work. They just |
| 13 |
seem to have found a more balanced way to dealing with it. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> Even if someone does invent something, they should only have |
| 16 |
> exclusive right to use it for 10 years, and only if they tell others how to |
| 17 |
> create it. I don't see how you could believe anything else (at least as far |
| 18 |
> as the patents are concerned) is morally acceptable, let alone see the |
| 19 |
> other view as immoral. -- |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I agree that their needs to be time and scope limitations, acceptable fair-use |
| 22 |
provisions, and full disclosure (as part of any registration process!) for |
| 23 |
IPR protection. Any creditable system needs to be balanced. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
But to simply say that there shouldn't be any form of protection for IPR isn't |
| 26 |
a position I'm willing to agree with. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Best regards, |
| 29 |
Stu |
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Stuart Herbert stuart@g.o |
| 32 |
Gentoo Developer http://www.gentoo.org/ |
| 33 |
Beta packages for download http://dev.gentoo.org/~stuart/packages/ |
| 34 |
Come and meet me in March 2004 http://www.phparch.com/cruise/ |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
GnuGP key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu |
| 37 |
Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319 C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C |
| 38 |
-- |
Archives