Re: [Fsfe-uk] Stalls at Marxism 2003

[Bernhard Kaindl]

On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Mike Taylor wrote:
> > I will write a draft covering the following points:
> >
> > 1. Patents are a form of interlectual property
>
> A. Typo: that's "intellectual", of course.
> B. More important, I am not convinced this is worth saying, as it
>    seems to me only to muddy the waters.  Stallman argues convincingly
>    (to my mind) that the whole concept of "intellectual property" is
>    an unhelpful one, muddying as it does several very different
>    concepts (patents, copyright, trademarks, etc.)
>    See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#IntellectualProperty

Fully agreed with what you say in B. and what Stallman says on this URL.

I think Stallman's explanation is very good. The word property after
interlectual suggests ultimatively that ideas or even all expressions
of intellect can be owned and traded, so I think this term is very much
against the philosophy of free software.

> > 2. Software patents are accumulate power in the hands of big business
> > 3. Software patents infringe the freedom to write computer software.
> > 4. Software patents are usually bariers to free software devlopment.
>
> These seem like much more pertinent arguments to me.  You might like
> to add 5. Software patents discourage competition.

I agree.

Empirical evidence (in studies) has shown that companies which invest
in patent portfolio do so as a diversion of founds from R&D.

I think this should be a very practical reason. I fact there are
so many things against them I just wanted to add antother one ;-)

http://wiki.ael.be/index.php/TopReasonsWhyNoEpatents

Bernhard

PS: The ultimate library against software patents is
swpat.ffii.org, AFAICS.