[OT] Free software versus software idea patents

[harrismh777]

Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> Please read
> <http://www.jprl.com/Blog/archive/development/mono/2009/Jan-19.html>
>
> If you still do not understand why this is a bogus issue then just go
> away.

Good blog--- off the point, but a nice rant none-the-less.

===== block quote ====
With all this in mind, you can see why patent FUD is hard to fight, 
because there's no way to dismiss it. Software patents are a reality, 
they're ugly, but they can't be avoided. (Yet they must be ignored, to 
avoid increased liability.)
===== /block quote ====

     His primary error in thought, suggests that we must live with 
software patents forever...  wrong.  They must be eliminated.


===== block quote ====
My problem is that the anti-Mono people only seem to focus on patents 
with respect to Mono and Microsoft, ignoring the rest of the software 
industry. They're ignoring the (gigantic) forest so that they can pay 
attention to a single tree, Microsoft.
===== /block quote ====

      Also, wrong.  In fact, Mono is at the bottom of my list. Even 
though Mono encourages .NET C#, it at least is open source software... 
my primary targets (there are hundreds of them) are way more important 
than Mono...

===== block quote ====
What I find even "funnier" is that Microsoft supposedly holds a number 
of patents in a number of areas frequently used by open-source projects, 
such as HTML, CSS, C++, XML, and others. So why don't we ever see any 
suggestions to avoid these technologies because the Big Bad Microsoft 
might sue?
===== /block quote ====

      This is because the patents are so obviously bogus (and vague) 
that even non-lawyers know that they wouldn't stand a chance in court. 
No, the dangers lie elsewhere. Microsoft is a bully... and how they 
choose their battles has been a mystery to many of us... like the B&N 
case... who knew?... frankly, I'm not concerned about Mono... at the 
moment Microsoft needs them... for the moment...

===== block quote ====
For that matter, (again) considering how vague software patents tend to 
be, wouldn't many Microsoft patents on .NET stand a chance at being 
applicable toward Java, Python, and other projects? (Again) Why just 
focus on Mono?

Final note: I am a Software Engineer, not a patent lawyer.
===== /block quote ====

      At least he admits that he doesn't know what he is talking about. 
That is refreshing.

      No one is focusing on *just* Mono...  nobody...  its just one area 
of concern. The reason Mono gets hit (from others besides me) is that 
they are in partnership and collaboration with Microsoft, consciously 
and unconsciously. This must be punished. Microsoft is a corporate 
bully, a terrible citizen, and officially (district and federal) a 
criminal, guilty of breaking anti-trust laws. FOSS should not 
collaborate with Microsoft, in any way. We won our class action suit 
against Microsoft here in Minnesota... out of which I received a 
smallish payout... and that is a start. Microsoft must cease to exist 
(as a business interest if necessary) as a corporate bully, and FOSS 
should have nothing to do with aiding them.

      This is not just business... this is principle. If you give up 
principle (Mono, or anyone else) even if you win, you lose.


kind regards,
m harris