[Nottingham] Patents considered harmful?

[Robert Davies]

On Thursday 04 Sep 2003 09:56, Martin Garton wrote:
> > http://lwn.net/Articles/47506/  - Arlene McCarthy's 'factsheet'
> >
> > She seems to be talking more sense, than her previous articles..
>
> She seems to be doing exactly the same as ever to me.

Compared to her previous output I read from her before eg) her Grauniad 
article, she has shifted alot.  The points made in the fact sheet, are 
broadly in line with points made by MEP's from other parties.

> She is saying all the right things that sound favourable, but when you
> read the actual proposal you find it will allow most of the same abuses we
> already see happening in the US.  There is a lot of detail about this at
> ffii.org

Any chance of you putting something together that's digestible?  The proposal 
details are not exactly light reading.

When opponents use smears (just like SCO case), to avoid loosing the middle 
ground uncommitted, we must make our points clearly and without seeming like 
fundamentalists.

The politicians are saying trust us, the proposals do not have the effect that 
the online press have been claiming, so we need to put rational points 
forward.

It is true that pathetically obvious patents have been issued, by the UK 
Patent Office, nevermind other European countries, and also it is true that 
countries courts tend to side with their own patent offices, no?

> I wrote to one of my MEPs Nick Clegg (Lib-Dem) several times explaining
> why I thing software patents are a terrible idea, and eventually received
> mildly encouraging responses.

I got same straight away, their position appeared the  most favourable to Open 
Source, Free software and (IMO) the commercial software development industry.

> I encourage anyone else who sees software
> patents as overall detrimental to our industry or community to do the same
> - especially if you work for one of the smaller software companies that
> McCarthy claims to want to support.

So how do we take on what the directive's proponents are saying and dismantle 
the statements they make?  What are the weaknesses?

Rob