www/philosophy patent-practice-panel.html

[Therese Godefroy]

CVSROOT:        /webcvs/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Therese Godefroy <th_g> 21/09/09 17:04:25

Modified files:
        philosophy     : patent-practice-panel.html 

Log message:
        More fixes to quotes and footer.

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/patent-practice-panel.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.17&r2=1.18

Patches:
Index: patent-practice-panel.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/patent-practice-panel.html,v
retrieving revision 1.17
retrieving revision 1.18
diff -u -b -r1.17 -r1.18
--- patent-practice-panel.html  9 Sep 2021 19:56:08 -0000       1.17
+++ patent-practice-panel.html  9 Sep 2021 21:04:23 -0000       1.18
@@ -17,11 +17,11 @@
 <address class="byline">by Daniel B. Ravicher</address>
 
 <div class="infobox">
-<p><em>This is a transcript of a panel presentation given by Daniel B.
+<p>This is a transcript of a panel presentation given by Daniel B.
 Ravicher as the executive director of the Public Patent Foundation on
 Wednesday, November 10, 2004, at a conference organized by the
 Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII) in Brussels,
-Belgium. The transcription was done by Aendrew Rininsland.</em></p>
+Belgium. The transcription was done by Aendrew Rininsland.</p>
 </div>
 <hr class="thin" />
 
@@ -62,7 +62,7 @@
 developers are still at an advantage&mdash;they start out at an
 advantage. Well, then, the next question to me is, &ldquo;If we have
 software patents, does that increase the advantage of large developers
-or decrease it?,&rdquo; because the patent system could benefit small
+or decrease it?&rdquo; because the patent system could benefit small
 developers and therefore that could erode some of the naturally
 existing benefits that large corporations have.
 </p>
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@
 <p>
 Now, I think it's important to concede the point that people on the
 other side will make, which is, will a less-onerous patent system, or
-they would call it a &lsquo;less-beneficial&rsquo; patent system, I
+they would call it a &ldquo;less-beneficial&rdquo; patent system, I
 call it less-onerous, will harm their business, because people could
 copy them. Well, large businesses aren't worried about being
 copied. They really aren't. At least not by other large businesses,
@@ -128,7 +128,7 @@
 company really didn't want its software to be copied, why is it
 licensing its patent portfolio to every other big company in the
 world? Because it can't stop them from copying it once they enter into
-that agreement, so this argument that , &ldquo;Well, we're worried
+that agreement, so this argument that, &ldquo;Well, we're worried
 about people copying our software,&rdquo; the most likely people to
 copy your software are other large businesses because they have the
 resources and the ability and the distribution channels and the brand
@@ -159,8 +159,8 @@
 anyone would debate that. They've never had to sue anyone for patent
 infringement. So they claim they need patents, but yet they've never
 had to use them. They cross-license them and that's where we wonder,
-&lsquo;If you're worried about people copying, then why are you
-cross-licensing them to people?&rsquo;.
+&ldquo;If you're worried about people copying, then why are you
+cross-licensing them to people?&rdquo;
 </p>
 
 <p>
@@ -183,7 +183,7 @@
 
 </div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
-<div id="footer">
+<div id="footer" role="contentinfo">
 <div class="unprintable">
 
 <p>Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to
@@ -237,10 +237,10 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2021/09/09 19:56:08 $
+$Date: 2021/09/09 21:04:23 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>
-</div>
+</div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include -->
 </body>
 </html>