begin oe_protect.scr
Philip <no_one@xxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> [H]omer wrote:
>> Mark Kent wrote:
>>
>>>begin oe_protect.scr
>>>Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>
>>
>>>>Supreme Court To Hear Arguments On Software Patents And Open Source
>>>>
>>>>,----[ Quote ]
>>>>| The opponents of proliferating software patents who see them as a
>>>>| threat to open source software may finally get their day in
>>>>| court--the U.S. Supreme Court.
>>>>`----
>>>>
>>>>http://www.governmententerprise.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=192501175
>>
>>
>>>What's going on here is so blindingly obvious that everyone can see
>>>it. Even this article is reasonably clear about it. What nobody
>>>seems to consider taking to task is the idiocy of making a patent
>>>office a profit-centre; where are the politicians in the US
>>>questioning such a clearly foolish move? Why is there /no/
>>>opposition in the US?
>>>
>>>Looking to our side of the Atlantic, I sincerely hope that the EU
>>>never falls into this childish trap.
>>
>>
>> What I can't understand, is why commercial entities (like Microsoft)
>> are even *allowed* to take part in a political decision making
>> process, the whole purpose of which is (essentially) an investigation
>> into the fairness of currently implemented business practise
>> (i.e. patents).
>>
>
> Corporation are "people" they pay taxes and get to vote (with their
> political contributions).
>
I understand that very well as a principle, although I'd point out that
large corps like MS pay very little tax indeed... however, it doesn't
really address my point.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Law of the Jungle:
He who hesitates is lunch.
|
|
