I'm getting confused with all these non-decimal units.
What's 82" in S.I. units? Is that about 2 cubits? (or are cubits a unit of volume?).
So, for those of us who don't live in one of the last few stated who have not adopted the S.I. (Burma, Liberia and the USA I believe are the only remaining 3), can we have S.I. units please.
I wonder if those 3 countries have anything else in common? Lets, see, they all execute children don't they - Oh no, USA just announced it will stop doing that!
Clearly, it depends on your perspective. If you are an investor in a business that earns from protected inventions, or if you are an inventor, then obviously, you may be inclined to think that they are good. If you have to pay someone who has done all the work to invent something, and you don't think you owe them anything, you might think they are bad. Each can be presented as greed.
I still think, and our political leadership in the EU (who are generally represent a wider range of interests than just hackers), agrees with me, that there is benefit in a scheme to reward innovation by enabling inventors to earn directly from their intellectual property (the invention) (as opposed say from just selling a better software implementation of an invention). The mind that can conceive a new algorithm or inventive process may not have the resources or discipline necessary to implement commercial quality product. Both are necessary, but without patents, the inventor will be ripped off by you guys.
You drive a car? not many built by individuals, corporations do that. Ever fly anywhere with your family on holidays? in a home-made plane I bet? No, but the're build by corporations too, and what about TV, thaty movie you went to, the shopping mall or supermarket you use - coproprations. Your pension is probbably managed by and invested in corporations. And the Drugs your sick granny, mother child uses, corporations too.
Rather than being evil, Corporations provide a strong legal framework and represent one of the highest achievements of modern sophisticated society. They enable us to co-operate to achieve more that any individual can, and to do it in an orderlay and fair and respectful way.
Or perhaps you prefer some of the alternatives: Tribalism? Feudalism? Communism?
Did the OTHER PEOPLE patent their ideas - are these patents still in force (i.e. less thatn 20 years old)? if so, then let these OTHER PEOPLE enforce their IP rights.
Thats all very well, but you can't patent an idea in europe or the US, software or otherwise. Your argument goes too far, but a good patent system is good for small inventors and small software developers. The real problem is that when we invent and patent our inventions, we pay a lot of money for an examiner to examine and approve or reject teh invention. This is not being done properly - there is not enough effort put into the examination. Thats where the problem lies, not in the patent system per se.
Maybe you dont understand the process, but you dont get a patent (As I have done) unless your idea is original - that's the basic requirement.
So if your attitude, knowledge and/or intelligence level are representative of teh anti-patent lobby, I can understand why you are all being ignored by the commission - you don't count. Your opinions are worthless, and your motives are just as greedy as thoes of us who want to support a patent system that protects real inventors (not hackers and plagerists).
Now I have the law on my side to protect my investment of blood-sweat and money in MY INVENTION from all you hackers who would happily steal my original idea and deprive me of the profit from it.
"Dont confuse property and intellectual property. Property usually has value and utility to a person with or without the legal framework of property rights."
Excluding intangiables like Love, Reputation etc, very little has value outside of a supportive legal structure. Value of a car whan anyone can take it, value of land in Darfur, Sudan?, value of Life in Iraq?
Get real, we're supposed to be a sophisticated civilization. We need structures to support our rights, not a free-for-all. Who will benifit from no software patents, the small guy? Are you NUTS??
I'm sure you mean "avoiding" tax, which is perfectly legitimate, not evading, as this would be a crime.
"nobody is obliged to organise their affairs in such a way as to enable the revenue to get the biggest shovel into them"
Many types of intangiable property expire over time: Property Leases, Contracts of many types, all have value, all expire in time.
Patents have been around for a long time, and there are many differing views. Ben Johnston invented a new type of stove and wouldn't patent it, but someone saw it and did patent it in Englend, and made a fortune. James Watt had long battles over his steam engine patent too.
But again and again, it is obvious, especially to small companies who do real inventive work, patents are a very valuable tool to protect us against the Giants who will happily steal your ideas, our lots of money into them and kill your opportunity.
This is recognised by governments. For example, in Ireland, ALL income from patent royalties is TAX FREE
So where do you draw the line between which property to protect? Do you propose that no intangiables should be protected? music, video, poetry novels... You have to draw the line somewhere.
As regards processes v software. Processes are implemented in software, true, but thats's just an abstract expression of the process. You could argue that the software should be protected by copyright, but the USE of the software should be protectd by PATENT. This is in fact what happens, because when a patent expires (20 years), the process becomes public domain, but software copyright remains.
If I invented a new process for a drug therapy, described in in writing, and patented the process. Should you be able to copy the document and perform the process freely? Then, say I built a machine to implement the process, can you copy this machine? (yes/no/maybe). Can you USE the machine to perform the process? where do you draw the line?
Or perhaps they should do their research first, and not re-invent the wheel, and then pretend that *they* have just developed a new and exciting product, when the invention has alredy been done by someone else, who may have spent lots of either time/money, and who they refuse to reward or acknowledge!!!!
US + European Corporations= our pension plans, widows and orphens funds, pay lots of tax to our states to educate (obviously wasted on you), run hospitals, etc...
More waffel,
If you think that having extraterratorial enforcement of US patent law in Europe is the real issue?.. and you're worried about this?...when we can't even agree which language, or even how to choose a language to be used as teh definitive text of a patent in a new single European Patent system???
The real problem with patents in Europe is that ther'e too expensive to get and to maintain.
Get a life (or get a patent, then you'll appreciate the issues)
If the patents are issued in Europe and nationalised, then they exist and are, in every respect property according to the law.
As with most things, you can challeng it through th courts if you feel you have a case.
Unless and until you do this, the property exists.
But are you confused about US patents being enforcable in Europe. They are not, and European one are not enforcable in the US. Patents which are in the PCT application phase will have some relevence to teh (127?) countries that have signed up the the PCT process, but they still need to be nationalised under the law in each juristiction.
See, no shouting needed!
First off, lots of European software companies own patents. Not specifically on software, but on processes. These are permitted. Say for example an new process for compressing an image, or for searching. That is patentable, whheter it's software or not.
Secondly, most of these European software companies also patent their inventions in the US, and are thus protected by US law against infringment of their patents in the US.
Thirdly, If a US company does the same, and patents their inventions in Europe, under the European system, and then nationalises their patent in any of the European countries, they are protected against infringment in the contries they have nationalised in. Thats fair enough isn't it?
Finally, what we are talking about are property rights, which are generally protected in our western societies. Would you want someone to move in and take something that belongs to you, and not pay compensation? If you think you can ignore property rights, even ones you don't agree with, then thats a political issue. Lile most valuable posessions (wealth), thoes who have them, want them, thoes who don have their own want to take others! In Europe, I hope we are sophisticated enough in our appreciation of the compeating rights involved to be able to balance theese rights and accept that there is a place for patent laws that incentivise and reward creative thinking.
Hi Dick, I know it's you from your e-mail addres : dickhead@Halliburton.iq
But honestly Dick, aren't there a few more chineese in china then there are people in USA, and do you not all use just a tad more than your fair share???
What TRIPE!
Must we fully understand something to have a falid opinion? I'm sure Socrates would have a view, but I really don't know him well enough to ask!
Slashdot Mirror
I'm getting confused with all these non-decimal units. What's 82" in S.I. units? Is that about 2 cubits? (or are cubits a unit of volume?).
So, for those of us who don't live in one of the last few stated who have not adopted the S.I. (Burma, Liberia and the USA I believe are the only remaining 3), can we have S.I. units please.
I wonder if those 3 countries have anything else in common? Lets, see, they all execute children don't they - Oh no, USA just announced it will stop doing that!
Clearly, it depends on your perspective. If you are an investor in a business that earns from protected inventions, or if you are an inventor, then obviously, you may be inclined to think that they are good. If you have to pay someone who has done all the work to invent something, and you don't think you owe them anything, you might think they are bad. Each can be presented as greed. I still think, and our political leadership in the EU (who are generally represent a wider range of interests than just hackers), agrees with me, that there is benefit in a scheme to reward innovation by enabling inventors to earn directly from their intellectual property (the invention) (as opposed say from just selling a better software implementation of an invention). The mind that can conceive a new algorithm or inventive process may not have the resources or discipline necessary to implement commercial quality product. Both are necessary, but without patents, the inventor will be ripped off by you guys.
You drive a car? not many built by individuals, corporations do that. Ever fly anywhere with your family on holidays? in a home-made plane I bet? No, but the're build by corporations too, and what about TV, thaty movie you went to, the shopping mall or supermarket you use - coproprations. Your pension is probbably managed by and invested in corporations. And the Drugs your sick granny, mother child uses, corporations too.
Rather than being evil, Corporations provide a strong legal framework and represent one of the highest achievements of modern sophisticated society. They enable us to co-operate to achieve more that any individual can, and to do it in an orderlay and fair and respectful way.
Or perhaps you prefer some of the alternatives: Tribalism?
Feudalism?
Communism?
Did the OTHER PEOPLE patent their ideas - are these patents still in force (i.e. less thatn 20 years old)? if so, then let these OTHER PEOPLE enforce their IP rights.
Thats all very well, but you can't patent an idea in europe or the US, software or otherwise. Your argument goes too far, but a good patent system is good for small inventors and small software developers. The real problem is that when we invent and patent our inventions, we pay a lot of money for an examiner to examine and approve or reject teh invention. This is not being done properly - there is not enough effort put into the examination. Thats where the problem lies, not in the patent system per se.
Maybe you dont understand the process, but you dont get a patent (As I have done) unless your idea is original - that's the basic requirement. So if your attitude, knowledge and/or intelligence level are representative of teh anti-patent lobby, I can understand why you are all being ignored by the commission - you don't count. Your opinions are worthless, and your motives are just as greedy as thoes of us who want to support a patent system that protects real inventors (not hackers and plagerists).
Now I have the law on my side to protect my investment of blood-sweat and money in MY INVENTION from all you hackers who would happily steal my original idea and deprive me of the profit from it.
But to patent it you MUST publicise it...
That's why you should do a simple, quick and cheap patent search before jumping feet first into an expensive product development project.
Wrong, I'm a small guy, I want 'em!
"Dont confuse property and intellectual property. Property usually has value and utility to a person with or without the legal framework of property rights." Excluding intangiables like Love, Reputation etc, very little has value outside of a supportive legal structure. Value of a car whan anyone can take it, value of land in Darfur, Sudan?, value of Life in Iraq? Get real, we're supposed to be a sophisticated civilization. We need structures to support our rights, not a free-for-all. Who will benifit from no software patents, the small guy? Are you NUTS??
ANAL
I'm sure you mean "avoiding" tax, which is perfectly legitimate, not evading, as this would be a crime. "nobody is obliged to organise their affairs in such a way as to enable the revenue to get the biggest shovel into them"
Odd then, if a lease is not property, why are leases bought and sold for large amounts of money every day ?
Appropriately moderated!
Many types of intangiable property expire over time: Property Leases, Contracts of many types, all have value, all expire in time.
Patents have been around for a long time, and there are many differing views. Ben Johnston invented a new type of stove and wouldn't patent it, but someone saw it and did patent it in Englend, and made a fortune. James Watt had long battles over his steam engine patent too.
But again and again, it is obvious, especially to small companies who do real inventive work, patents are a very valuable tool to protect us against the Giants who will happily steal your ideas, our lots of money into them and kill your opportunity.
This is recognised by governments. For example, in Ireland, ALL income from patent royalties is TAX FREE
So where do you draw the line between which property to protect? Do you propose that no intangiables should be protected? music, video, poetry novels... You have to draw the line somewhere. As regards processes v software. Processes are implemented in software, true, but thats's just an abstract expression of the process. You could argue that the software should be protected by copyright, but the USE of the software should be protectd by PATENT. This is in fact what happens, because when a patent expires (20 years), the process becomes public domain, but software copyright remains.
If I invented a new process for a drug therapy, described in in writing, and patented the process. Should you be able to copy the document and perform the process freely? Then, say I built a machine to implement the process, can you copy this machine? (yes/no/maybe). Can you USE the machine to perform the process? where do you draw the line?
Or perhaps they should do their research first, and not re-invent the wheel, and then pretend that *they* have just developed a new and exciting product, when the invention has alredy been done by someone else, who may have spent lots of either time/money, and who they refuse to reward or acknowledge!!!!
US + European Corporations= our pension plans, widows and orphens funds, pay lots of tax to our states to educate (obviously wasted on you), run hospitals, etc...
More waffel, If you think that having extraterratorial enforcement of US patent law in Europe is the real issue? .. and you're worried about this? ...when we can't even agree which language, or even how to choose a language to be used as teh definitive text of a patent in a new single European Patent system???
The real problem with patents in Europe is that ther'e too expensive to get and to maintain.
Get a life (or get a patent, then you'll appreciate the issues)
If the patents are issued in Europe and nationalised, then they exist and are, in every respect property according to the law.
As with most things, you can challeng it through th courts if you feel you have a case.
Unless and until you do this, the property exists.
But are you confused about US patents being enforcable in Europe. They are not, and European one are not enforcable in the US. Patents which are in the PCT application phase will have some relevence to teh (127?) countries that have signed up the the PCT process, but they still need to be nationalised under the law in each juristiction.
See, no shouting needed!
First off, lots of European software companies own patents. Not specifically on software, but on processes. These are permitted. Say for example an new process for compressing an image, or for searching. That is patentable, whheter it's software or not.
Secondly, most of these European software companies also patent their inventions in the US, and are thus protected by US law against infringment of their patents in the US.
Thirdly, If a US company does the same, and patents their inventions in Europe, under the European system, and then nationalises their patent in any of the European countries, they are protected against infringment in the contries they have nationalised in. Thats fair enough isn't it?
Finally, what we are talking about are property rights, which are generally protected in our western societies. Would you want someone to move in and take something that belongs to you, and not pay compensation? If you think you can ignore property rights, even ones you don't agree with, then thats a political issue. Lile most valuable posessions (wealth), thoes who have them, want them, thoes who don have their own want to take others! In Europe, I hope we are sophisticated enough in our appreciation of the compeating rights involved to be able to balance theese rights and accept that there is a place for patent laws that incentivise and reward creative thinking.
Hi Dick, I know it's you from your e-mail addres : dickhead@Halliburton.iq But honestly Dick, aren't there a few more chineese in china then there are people in USA, and do you not all use just a tad more than your fair share???
What TRIPE! Must we fully understand something to have a falid opinion? I'm sure Socrates would have a view, but I really don't know him well enough to ask!
Did the include the millions of farting cattle in this model? and what about Guinness drinkers? Are they covered?