Posts by Don Christie
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Oops. I should edit that last post but I like the </craig> ending to my quote block :-)
Can PA give us special Craig tags?
-
Craig
<quote>Perhaps I'm rather naive, but it might have helped if most of those "veterans" had at least tried to hide their utter contempt for Cameron's attempt to drag the Conservatives out of the hole they'd dug.</craig>
Yep
And Ashcroft complaining about the TV debates was remarkable. The Tories have been pushing these for at least a year, convinced that their man would wipe the floor with his opponents.
Maybe if Lord A had paid more taxes he would not have become the distracting story he is.
My view is that the most representative result of this election would be a centre right coalition. Not my personal preference but that is the way the votes seem to have gone.
But, If the Lib/Dems blow this chance of electoral reform then they don't deserve a single vote from the UK electorate again, ever.
-
Them's a nice "quirks".
No doubt it's because they hate freedom of speech in the UK.
-
Gordon Brown finally hit some straps.
What is interesting to NZ is how the British public are finally realising how fundamentally undemocratic a system FPP is. And yet, coverage of that aspect in our press is pathetic.
-
gotten up
I think that's what you do for the Superbowl. Never for an FA Cup.
-
Congrats. Is that a picture of you on the ride on mower on the consumer homepage?
-
But if you're going to be a dick about it, then I think that this is the point at which I bow out.
Whatever.
The case was proven to the Select Committee and Minister. You and Scotty seemed to disapprove. And yet I still see no compelling argument that stacks up in your favour. Failing to see this is hardly being a "dick". All I am doing is asking for some evidence of good.
-
Don't you just love it when an industry says 'no' but the lawyers still want to shove something down your throats?
I'm obvisouly getting too old but I consider 1991 and 1995 pretty recent, even in software terms. This experiement with patents where they should not been allowed has been a complete waste of time and money, as Rich's last post amply demonstrates.
The "lawyerly trick" quote comes from a Federal District Court Judge in the USA who has just made a ruling that genes cannot be patented. Similar arguments apply:
http://opensource.com/law/10/4/gene-patenting-and-free-software-breakthrough
Why does this relate to ACTA? Because NZ is finding its own way through the software patent mire but ACTA would remove our right to do that.
-
I've said what I wanted to say.
But sadly, like many patent lawyers, presented no evidence to justify extending the what should be a limited privilege of patents to software.
-
There's nothing special about IT.
Agreed. You are the one arguing for a special case, not me. This is why software doesn't need the "special" treatment patents give. There is "nothing special" about law either but I don't see too many lawyers rushing to have patents apply to special defences.
Rich, you and Scott still have not explained why it is a benefit to have s/w patents. What you are using is a "lawyerly trick" to try and patent what should not be patentable.
At a more practical level, as a software developer I can code up 100s of supposedly patentable concepts in a day. This is not "hard invention" work. Where are all the patent examiners going to come from?