The WIPO Intellectual Property Forum - defend your right to Ruby.

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by John Carter, Jun 1, 2005.

  1. John Carter

    John Carter Guest

    Here is an opportunity to fight the new Imperialism.
    Intellectual Property.

    Ruby exists in the narrow space provided by the fact it is too small a
    target for patent challenges.

    If(when) Ruby usage grows large enough to attract hostile attention, Matz
    would not financially survive a flood of patent suits.

    Asia should view WIPO as Imperialism and Colonialism taken into a new
    domain, intellectual property.

    The West is basically saying to Asia, as they did in the Bad Old days of
    Colonialism, we will let you rent the property that we have stolen from
    you.

    They may be your own ideas, you may have developed them yourselves, but
    you will have to pay us rent for them.

    Please express, in a firm but civil manner, your opinions at...
    http://www.wipo.int/ipisforum/en/


    John Carter
    John Carter, Jun 1, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 07:35:23AM +0900, John Carter wrote:
    > Here is an opportunity to fight the new Imperialism.
    > Intellectual Property.
    >

    ...
    > Asia should view WIPO as Imperialism and Colonialism taken into a new
    > domain, intellectual property.
    >
    > The West is basically saying to Asia, as they did in the Bad Old days of
    > Colonialism, we will let you rent the property that we have stolen from
    > you.
    >
    > They may be your own ideas, you may have developed them yourselves, but
    > you will have to pay us rent for them.
    >

    Hello

    Either I have missed something or your view of the IP problem is
    somewhat obscured and biased.

    For one, the patents are awarded in certain country. So if you are
    Japanese, you can get the wheel(!) patented in Japan before a corporation
    does. But it is independent of the fact that it is already patented in
    Australia.

    The general problems with patents are
    - You only pay to get something patented, there is nobody opposing
    patantability of trivial ideas. Thus the number and significance of
    patents is proportional to money invested in patent lawyers, not to
    the amount of actual innovation contributed.
    - Although you would probably lose if you litigated against car
    industry that they infringe on your wheel patent, there is nothing
    that would stop you from defending similar trivial software patents
    in court, except lack of money.
    - Even the most powerful corporations must fear a flood of patent suits
    that they cannot financially survive. For an individual or a small
    company even a single patent suit may be devastating. And it is not
    about winning or losing yet, it is about paying the expenses for
    several years of examinations at court.

    Note that the corporations that own the large patent portfolios (either
    to make money on suing everybody around the globe or to protect
    themseves) are international. Even if larger portion of them was
    originally founded in US than Asia it is irrelevant. Most hire people in
    the parts of the world where people are cheap, and file patents in all
    countries where it is possible.

    How is this related to colonialism is beyond me. I'm sure that Asian
    people own large portions of the stock of originally US corporations,
    and vice versa. And all are stock holders are demanding that the value
    of their stock should be kept as high as possible, even at the price of
    devastaing free software, the environment, other people, or anything
    else that can be devastated "profitably" :p

    Michal Suchanek
    Michal 'hramrach' Suchanek, Jun 3, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. John Carter

    Kero Guest

    > For one, the patents are awarded in certain country. So if you are
    > Japanese, you can get the wheel(!) patented in Japan before a corporation
    > does. But it is independent of the fact that it is already patented in
    > Australia.


    The "wheel patent" in Australia is *not* what you would consider a
    "wheel patent" in USA or Europe. Since it has not been checked by a patent
    officer (reducing costs for inventors??) it does not have the same status as a
    "real patent".

    http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/auspac/07/02/australia.wheel/

    in particular "The name should be changed to "Registered Innovation"
    to avoid confusion with standard patents, Keogh says."

    Regards,
    Kero.

    +--- Kero ------------------------- kero@chello@nl ---+
    | all the meaningless and empty words I spoke |
    | Promises -- The Cranberries |
    +--- M38c --- http://members.chello.nl/k.vangelder ---+
    Kero, Jun 3, 2005
    #3
  4. Hi!

    At Fri, 3 Jun 2005 23:41:53 +0900, Michal 'hramrach' Suchanek wrote:
    >
    > On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 07:35:23AM +0900, John Carter wrote:
    >
    > - You only pay to get something patented, there is nobody opposing
    > patantability of trivial ideas.


    In Germany it is unlawful to issue a patent for something that is a
    new invention *and* can be turned into money. It is especially
    prohibited by law to issue patents for software. That is not my
    personal opinion but an (admittedly somewhat sloppy) translation of
    what is written in the German Patentgesetz (patent law).

    Presently the EU comission is trying to railroad a bill about what
    they call "harmonization of patent laws" but that in fact is "an a
    posteriori legalization of crimes" - they should rather punish those
    who consiously violated laws and abused their power.

    BTW: That is one of the reasons for my signature...

    Josef 'Jupp' SCHUGT
    --
    "NO" to the European constitution means "YES" to democracy, not "NO"
    to Europe - presently Europe as a whole is governed by a central
    committee while the parliament only has very limited power.
    Josef 'Jupp' SCHUGT, Jun 4, 2005
    #4
  5. On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 at 03:15:24AM +0900, Kero wrote:
    > > For one, the patents are awarded in certain country. So if you are
    > > Japanese, you can get the wheel(!) patented in Japan before a corporation
    > > does. But it is independent of the fact that it is already patented in
    > > Australia.

    >
    > The "wheel patent" in Australia is *not* what you would consider a
    > "wheel patent" in USA or Europe. Since it has not been checked by a patent
    > officer (reducing costs for inventors??) it does not have the same status as a
    > "real patent".
    >
    > http://edition.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/auspac/07/02/australia.wheel/
    >
    > in particular "The name should be changed to "Registered Innovation"
    > to avoid confusion with standard patents, Keogh says."


    OK, the wheel is some sort of simplified patent.
    However, this is not:
    http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6368227.html
    in news http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2178

    And the webshop showing some "quality" software patents:
    http://webshop.ffii.org/

    Thanks

    Michal Suchanek
    Michal 'hramrach' Suchanek, Jun 6, 2005
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Martin
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    361
    Martin
    Mar 3, 2004
  2. Scooby Doo

    newbie -how do you defend your decision?

    Scooby Doo, Jul 19, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    340
    Kevin Spencer
    Jul 20, 2004
  3. Ben Finney
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    416
    Peter Hansen
    Jul 12, 2003
  4. waldo
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    253
    waldo
    Apr 3, 2011
  5. waldo
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    433
    markspace
    Apr 4, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page