Promotion of software patents == opposition to Open Source.

[Russell McOrmond]

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Alexander Terekhov wrote:

> (Russell McOrmond's Submission to 2001 copyright reform)

  My most recent submission to the Canadian government on copyright policy
includes a reference to that document among others.  No need to reference
the Google version when the original is still proudly published by its
author: http://www.flora.ca/copyright2003/

  Hopefully people can read the full versions to get the context of your
out-of-context quote.  Many of the laws you appear to promote are in fact
against private property(1) so quoting that I believe thinking of
knowledge as property is unhealthy to the debate doesn't serve the purpose
you intended.

(1) Software patents and interface copyrights are used to revoke creators
rights (copyright holder need not be aware of a patent in order to have
information process patent infringement claims revoke their copyright - a
real form of "copyright theft") and traditional property rights (owners of
ICT licensed to be under the control of some third party, part of the DMCA
problem).

  I even include a Thomas Jefferson quote on my homepage and in that paper
if you wanted to reference that as some sort of proof of my politics
http://www.flora.ca/russell/

"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of
exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an
idea..."
  
> You know, rather than asking "questions" you should have simply 
> posted http://emoglen.law.columbia.edu/publications/dcm.html and 
> be done with it. I, for one, don't share your beliefs, obviously.

  I just looked at the title as I had never seen this before: "The
dotCommunist Manifesto". I gather this is your way of ducking the
questions. At least you didn't mention the name "Hitler", but the
technique is quite similar to try to dismiss someone by attributing
qualities to them that aren't true (or aren't relevant to the conversation
even if they were true).

  Just so you know, I support the views I have because I am a supporter of
free market capitalism in a post-industrial economy.  I find that all
these 'ist and 'ism words never help a dialog.  I don't go around saying
that anyone who disagrees with me is this 'ist or that 'ist.  I doubt you
would like or agree with which 'ists your views that seem opposed to
creators rights, private property, and free markets make you look like
either *grins*


  The Open Source software movement exists across all parts of the
left-vs-right political spectrum, and you simply cannot 'dismiss' it as
being either Left-Wing or Right-Wing as it is neither and both.

  By the way:  PCT/IPR is to creators' rights like water is to humans: too
much and they drown, too little and they dehydrate.  If you continue to
try to over-simply things with "more protection, more water" and drown the
software sector you may get what appears to be your wish and have IBM the
only entity that survives.

  I will continue to do whatever I can to promote the Open Source movement
(regardless of which name a particular group uses for it) to make
lifeboats to protect people against that attack.

---
 Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/> 
 Governance software that controls ICT, automates government policy, or
 electronically counts votes, shouldn't be bought any more than 
 politicians should be bought.  -- http://www.flora.ca/russell/


--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3