Re: [Fsfe-uk] Research questions

[Ian Lynch]

On Tue, 2004-07-27 at 02:38, P.L.Hayes wrote:

> To me, the Bromcom technology seems a little too technical and what's 
> 'worse'; 
> it looks like the good guys have actually prevailed this time.

Only because the actual bit patented turned out to be begnign.

>  Tabbed 
> palettes and progress bars however are graphical, easy to understand and 
> highly visible 'technologies' - already covered by European patents and just 
> waiting for legal 'validation'. 

I thin kyou need some concrete examples where these patents have been
enforced to the detriment of some group of people otherwise it will be
seen as just paranoia and hysteria.

> They pose an imminent and insidious but very 
> real threat and I think it would be quite wrong to give the public the 
> impression that the threat is only to profit making software businesses:

The main threat from the BromCom patent was to end users. Schools were
forced to pay a lot more for the products starving other aspects of the
curriculum eg learning a musical instrument, additional support for
special needs...it can ba eas emotive as you want it to be.

>  All 
> software patents are outrageous infringements of *individual* freedom of 
> expression but you'll never convince the public of that unless you can show 
> them that there are people out there who actually use their computers like 
> musicians use their instruments and their music-ruled manuscript. 

Equally they won't be convinced unless you show them actual cases where
such patents have been enforced to the detrimnet of an average computer
user.
-- 
Ian Lynch <address@hidden>
ZMS Ltd