Slashdot Mirror

I don't remember when. I do remember where.

Until the law gets back to where a reasonable person would consider it fair, it will be ignored. We may have to pass through zero to get there.

Patents are intended to promote progress, and patent law as implemented performs the opposite function. We might as well start over from zero.

If you think you can get 38 states to sign off on a DRM banning amendment then I guess all the power to you.

The relevant section is Article 1, Section 8: To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.

Why cure the symptom when you can cure the disease? These "rights" no longer "promote the progress of science and the useful arts" so they are no longer justified. The text of the amendment is simple and clear: "Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution is repealed."

How is this change not to the public benefit? Shall our future ever be held hostage to the patent troll? Shall expression ever be limited by the ??AA? Are we done exploring the undiscovered countries of creativity, mathematics, science and cleverness? I think not. Do you?

I'm going to question the utility of that. A judge can learn. A juror can learn. You cannot drag up the average judge and jury and you should not hope for that. It's neither a judge nor juror's job to understand technology, nor should it be. It's the job of experts to make the utility of technology available to the common man, without the need to understand its underlying complexity. It's no more beneficial to the common person to teach him the principles of network architecture than to teach him to be a medical diagnostician or to teach him to be expert in the nuances of bankruptcy law. Noone can become expert in everything -- that's why we have experts. The job of the experts is to make the underlying complexity possible to use by designing a useful simplified interface to it. Because you bridge the gap because of your practice specialty makes you special squared and your job doubly hard. You've done well, but like me you're old and your ability to internalize new concepts is limited. It would be nice if you found a nice young tech/legal person to be your apprentice.

Getting pre-educated judges and juries is wishful thinking. I think the utility is in educating the good lawyers and hoping they don't turn to the dark side, which is bordering on fatal optimism, I know, but it's preferable to getting the knowledgable to earn law degrees and begin practice of law - that would be like pissing in the font of wisdom. You've made great strides in getting educated and I owe you a due debt both for your achievements and for much amusement in the process.

I respect and admire you. You have given me, and everybody, much benefit both in your successes and your failures. Yet I would caution you. I would prefer that you continue to be successful in your path, and so I would caution you to avoid an excess of zeal. Though your limited constituency here in geekland holds you up high, you have not and will not earn the respect of the common man. You must not let our enthusiasm lead you to believe you have the support of everyone everywhere. That road leads to Jack Thompson's fate. You can be more moderate and modest and careful in your public expressions, and in my estimate you must if you are to continue to do well. Let us who rant and rave anonymously, like me and twitter, beat your drum for you in the most extreme cases. You need not make your case more dramatic than it is -- you are the very voice of reason against the tyranny of monopoly and madness of submission to it.

And forgive me for advocating the end of copyright and patents. Although I know you don't support it, you must agree that it would end your struggle to defend people against the evil **AA monopolies. It would also put a lot of lawyers out of work. I like you, but most of us would consider that last a good thing. Yes, in the short term there would be social costs, and in the long term it would need to be reinstated again with careful limits. Still, I see no real cure but to kill the whole tree, root and branch - and start afresh with our current understanding of the risks.

Stories that are told that are retold become our culture. If the stories are owned and cannot be retold they might be lucrative, but they can't become culture. Copyright is the theft of culture from the future. Copyright must be abolished because as implemented it prevents the fair use of works long in the public domain.

This is a good place to thank Larry for keeping up the good fight. God Bless you Larry, I hope you win and I'm glad to continue to donate to your cause.

While I share your respect for the Founders' vision, the system of copyright we have now is founded in British common law, and in fact harks back to 1662. Copyrights originally carried for 27 years, and currently go for over 100 years. Thomas Jefferson considered 14 years and he was reluctant about even that and was swayed (or more likely, conceded to get a more important concession) by James Madison. Patents originated further back in ancient Greece, around 500BC and originally carried for 1 year but now extend to up to 20 years. Both have been extended to include things not then invented that are far beyond the original scope.

Should every modern presentation of the dramatic arts credit the contribution of Aeschylus? Should each modern electronic inventor credit Julius Edgar Lilienfeld? Maybe. But should some portion of the profits go to them? Probably not. Each was standing on the shoulders of prior giants after all, as are we all, and neither (being dead) would benefit from the cash.

Innovation happens in a climate that encourages or requires it. Perhaps the defining characteristic of Men is that we take the inventions of others and improve them. Each inventor and creator owes a debt to the culture and climate that fostered him or her. That debt is fulfilled when their creation becomes the property of all in the commons from whence a new generation of creator draws from the well and adds their contribution, to profit from for a limited time but ultimately to become part of the common pool again.

The current climate encourages neither business nor innovation. This is a lawyer's paradise where they can make claims of infringements for forgotten claims decades - no, even a whole century - from a prior claim of invention and need prevail only one time in a dozen to reap ridiculous wealth. In the mean time their suits and The duration is being stretched beyond imagining, supported and extended by the wealth of those who support and exploit the inventions of others without inventing, creating, or building anything (NPE). The Crazy Years are truly upon us. I believe there was once a popular author whose histrionic vision included such a period that ended in "the year they hanged the lawyers".

Copyrights and patents have become monsters that must be slain.

I prefer disarmament.

It was actually Thomas McCauley in 1841.

And yes, he considered these issues and came to the same conclusions as Mr. Lessig over 150 years ago.

Maybe we should just do away with copyright. That would solve this problem permanently without consuming the precious resources of the courts.

You may want to read another perspective on the subject. Everything in this thread that might be insightful was said in 1841 and 1842 by Thomas Macaulay in a speech before the British Parliament.

Teaser:

Remember too that, when once it ceases to be considered as wrong and discreditable to invade literary property, no person can say where the invasion will stop.

Copyrights and patents no longer server their purpose which is: "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries."

You will find plenty more there if you're interested in joining us in the fight to abolish copyright in order to promote progress of science and useful arts.

You may want to read another perspective on the subject. Everything in this thread that might be insightful was said in 1841 and 1842 by Thomas Macaulay in a speech before the British Parliament.

Teaser:

Remember too that, when once it ceases to be considered as wrong and discreditable to invade literary property, no person can say where the invasion will stop.

Copyrights and patents no longer server their purpose which is: "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries."

You will find plenty more there if you're interested in joining us in the fight to abolish copyright in order to promote progress of science and useful arts.

We need a ruling that software patents are void. We're well on the way. Recent Supreme Court rulings are indicative of a climate change in the Court.

People need to get behind the idea that software patents and copyrights serve to prevent "the progress of science and useful arts."

Progress is the goal. If the tool no longer serves it, it needs to be abandoned.

Lawyers in these cases have argued that "making available is the same as distributing," that a single shared song is worth hundreds of thousands of dollars and a great many things that are far more absurd than my statement. The law is an ass and the lawyers in these cases are abusing the ignorance of the courts and the rights of the people.

It's time to take back ownership of our network, our computers, our rights to fair use and our right to "progress of science and useful arts" by taking back ownership of the related symbols. All of them. Where the constitution reads "securing for limited times" the framers did not intend for it to extend to over 100 years. 3 years is more like it. I could go with 30 days, or none.

These patents involving a stick as a proportional control for direction are creative, innovative and represent a clever improvement in the art. What I'm not sure of is how the inventor is alive still, as the idea has been around for quite a while, as shown by these craft which used the identical principle.

Aw, who am I kidding? If there were no patents all of the people involved here could have spent the last year of their lives doing something useful instead of quite carefully and at horrific cost arriving at a conclusion destined to be overturned on appeal. All they've accomplished is to drive up the cost of everything we buy and impede the progress of science and the useful arts.

Patents and copyright need to go away.

Here's a novel idea: abolish copyright.. We should act now before this gets even more dumb.

"To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries" - U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8

If they no longer serve this purpose is it time to abolish copyrights and patents?

Maybe if we abolish copyright they'll hear us then.

"Can you hear me now?"

Freeing up IP is essential for making health, education and the energy market cheaper and more universal. In the last 5 to 10 years, first world governments have been 'pulling up the ladder' in this regard rather than opening up to the people. It's almost as though they are anticipating something

Progress is made by shared invention. Once upon a time invention sharing was universal but progress was slow. Then we had copyrights and patents and the intent of these was to encourage investment in invention by granting a temporary monopoly on it. That worked for a while. Economic interests have spoiled this by extending the monopoly into eternity and twisting the word invention to absurdity. These days people are choosing to share their invention from the beginning or not at all.

It may be time to end the zenlike "temporary yet eternal" monopolies granted under copyright and patent.

Blog pimp: Why not hop on over and help?

Full disclosure: I was involved in setting this site up. It's brand new and may come to nothing. Still... It's what you make of it.