__/ [ Mark Kent ] on Monday 04 September 2006 15:16 \__
> 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?
There are many institutes that are artificially put in place to keep people
employed, save face, or increase taxation (whichever income stream deems
suitable). Examples: Driver's registration/licencing, which puts an entry
barrier in the face of those who are less affluent.
To borrow a related but different example, think about the so-called
'security' industry. I am not referring to physical breach and use of
technology to intercept crimical plots, which is something Bruce Schneier
seems to put special emphasis on in his security blog. I am thinking about
'bug fixes' in the form of plaster walls -- something that has become a
multi-billion dollar industry which Microsoft intends to harness, along with
some financial inheritance. It's enough to get Ballmer bouncing like a
dingo.
> Looking to our side of the Atlantic, I sincerely hope that the EU never
> falls into this childish trap.
|
|
