> But isn't it a good thing to protect individual rights and intellectual
> property?  I don't know if you are also one of those who support the
> abrogation of patent laws as well.  There is some interest in that
> scenario.

There is a very clear separation line between software patents,
copyrights, and this (open vs. proprietary) case. The GPL *is* a legal
license that incorporates and stipulates the views and policy of the
license holders and if, in any way, and at any time, someone will
invalidate it, then he will have put all other legal licenses and legal
intellectual property protection systems under question. If someone can
run to Congress or anywhere else and attack a license on the grounds it is
un-whatever, after failing to do so in court, and thus bypass the legal
system it is defined in, then anyone can do that, with any license or
intellectual property. The victory of open source licensed under GPL will
mean that in fact the current protection scheme *does* work. If they will
loose, fear for any license or patent you may have, as defending it in
court will no longer be enough even if you win.

The small jump from this to generic drugs and antibiotics, genetics
patenting, life-saving medical procedure patenting, and many other things,
is too obvious for me not to mention it here.

> Personally, I am not sure whether or not there is some satirical joke in
> suggesting open-software.  or even as some have suggested open-patents.

There is about as much satire in it, as would be in making all roads, toll
roads, starting tomorrow morning at 0700 sharp, and holding all persons
who ever contributed to its building, design, and maintenance, responsible
for anything that happens on it, for the remaining half of eternity (yes,
that includes all the streetcleaners who ever swept it).

And by toll roads I mean including your own driveway and there would be a
different toll for walking alone or in groups, and a discount for children
and the elderly, and you'd be forced to declare income for taxation
purposes on tolls you would force visiting friends and your mother pay you
whenever they walk on your own porch.

Open patents already exist, they are called public domain. If you've ever
used a wheel, water, fire, a shoe, or a pencil, then you probably already
use Open Patented objects and procedures. If you would like to pay someone
money for those and many other actions, you might come to live to regret
it very soon. The US Patent Office seems to close its eyes quite often
when a new Invention incorporates large amounts of public domain, but
other people do not and will not.

Incidentally the GPL and what it stands for is the exact, precise, legal
opposite of public domain, it being a license for the limited and clearly
defined use of a technology or software, with clearly defined owners, as
opposed to public domain.

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
mailto:piclist-unsubscribe-request@mitvma.mit.edu