On Sun, 2007-07-08 at 15:05 -0400, Todd Zullinger wrote: > Les Mikesell wrote: > > Alan Cox wrote: > >> Don't know. Ask a patent lawyer > > > > Lawyers sometimes win, sometimes lose when their opinions are tested > > in court. How would I know I'm asking the one that would win? > > You don't. That's the beauty of the law. :-/ > > There used to be a concept of "void for vagueness" which could be used > to help nullify laws which were so vague that most people couldn't > tell what they meant. I suppose that was ditched here in the USSA > along with most of the rest of the Constitution over the last 50 > years. > > But aren't there more appropriate lists for discussion of the > legalities and politics of patent law? Rehashing this stuff here is > just added noise on an already noisy list. > I think you are right on how much it adds to the list noise, but this subject is a real issue with Microsoft's present actions, affecting us greatly in what we have and do not have, and how we can use it. It may not be technical, but it is germane to our intent to have and use Fedora. What are the limits, how can it affect us, and what can we do about it, if anything? And this not only affects the US. The UK either is implementing some of the types of law that impact this, but also the rest of the world is looking at how to divvy up the technological pie. Musicians have lost control of their works, and engineers have no control of theirs, should we, as programmers and creators as well as users of technology suffer the same fate? How can we best protect ourselves, make our creations and have some assurance that ownership, and at least a good share of the profitability remains ours? If we do not discuss these issues, and let the people of the world see the issues that affect us, what will be the long term affect? And few of us can understand the mechanisms that many legal websites have. The verbiage is different. Lawyer speak and geek speak are not common ground. Also everything a lawyer or legal site says is always protected with that "This is not advice or basis for actions. Please consult your lawyer." In other words, the law is too flexible for us to have any assurance that we are within our rights, at least in the US. This affects us all. Not that we want it to, but it does. And with Microsoft in the wings touting what it will do. I am afraid of such things, and while that may not be reasonable to most of you, I have had something I loved taken from me already by legal action. I am now no longer as carefree as I once was. In fact none of us are as free as we were, and it didn't start with G.W.Bush, but with Carter and the base actions on all the DMCA and DRM stuff that began on his watch. And it affects the whole world, by affecting product designs, product availability, product transferability, and other limitations on the free market of ideas and products. It is chilling the evolution of our systems, and curtailing new progress. I know I haven't written anything new for ages, nor have I seen much that is new for ages. And it is not because all the software systems and principles are so well understood. We all feel the oppression of the folks that want to garner all of the IP for themselves, from the patent farms, to the fools that file patents because they added a fastener, to all the lawyers who write the EULA's and force us into arbitration agreements which we would never agree to. We are held hostage in a world of legalese that we cannot penetrate or in many cases fathom. How do we change it? By open discussion, by getting the authorities attention to the facts and by isolating and not developing the platforms that assume the superior attitude, and by developing superior alternatives that do not conform to their rules and standards. Active processes. This forum is one of those processes. Regards, Les Howell
