Making the case against software patents (Was: Re: [Fsfe-ie] Ivana Bacik
s_fsfeurope2 at nedprod.com
Mon May 24 02:32:46 CEST 2004
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 23 May 2004 at 11:26, Ian Clarke wrote:
> In other words, how are we to warn people not to take the statements
> of the pro-patent lobby at face-value without simply denouncing them
> as outright liars (which would allow our opponents to accuse us of
> making an ad hominem argument and inappropriately "aggressive"
> lobbying tactics).
If pro-patent supporters really don't want software to be patentable,
why are they opposing the clarifying amendments such as the EP came
I'd like to see them explain that one. If they try, quote the
specific amendment which means "computer software shall not be
patentable full stop period forever" and ask them precisely what is
wrong with that amendment.
They won't be able to answer, because that specific amendment has no
unintended consequences, no accidental side effects - it simply makes
software unpatentable. Yet the pro-patent lobby doesn't want it.
(You'll have to look up the specific amendment I'm on about, I know
it's there from memory).
Quoting that amendment will defeat any pro-patent foe within seconds -
therefore it's useful for radio interviews and quoting to
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: idw's PGP-Frontend 126.96.36.199 / 9-2003 + PGP 8.0.2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the FSFE-IE