Re: Gates Patents Flipping a Light Switch

[Lee Hollaar]

In article <slrncacuj8.nde.zen19725@cabalamat.cabalamat.org> zen19725@zen.co.uk 
(phil hunt) writes:
>On Sat, 15 May 2004 15:13:11 -0400, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>>In article <slrncac935.m82.zen19725@cabalamat.cabalamat.org>,
>> zen19725@zen.co.uk (phil hunt) wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 14 May 2004 16:45:21 -0400, Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> 
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >No, I didn't overlook it.  My point is that without patents, even these 
>>> >rare wins would be virtually impossible.  Patents are one of the few 
>>> >weapons a small player can wield against a behemoth like Microsoft.
>>> 
>>> On the contrary, patents help microsoft in their fight against pesky 
>>> competition, especially that of the open source variety. MS *loves* 
>>> patents, because it gives them the chance to make it a crime for 
>>> anyone to compete with them.
>>
>>Of course it helps Microsoft.  It helps *everyone* -- big guys and 
>>little guys.
>
>So, IYO, criminalising open source software helps people who use 
>open source software.

At least in the United States, there are no criminal provisions that
stem from patent infringement.  There are for copyright, but that is
not what is being discussed here.


>You're an idiot, aren't you?

He didn't have to bring up some phantom "criminalising" to make his
point ...