Re: Basic Economics Lesson for [H]omer (was Re: The "right" to "own" knowledge) - Linux

This is a discussion on Re: Basic Economics Lesson for [H]omer (was Re: The "right" to "own" knowledge) - Linux ; In article , "Phil Da Lick!" wrote: > > Really? You should write a paper on this and publish it. I'm sure the > > world's economists would be interested in your research, as it disagrees > > with most ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Re: Basic Economics Lesson for [H]omer (was Re: The "right" to "own" knowledge)

  1. Re: Basic Economics Lesson for [H]omer (was Re: The "right" to "own" knowledge)

    In article ,
    "Phil Da Lick!" wrote:
    > > Really? You should write a paper on this and publish it. I'm sure the
    > > world's economists would be interested in your research, as it disagrees
    > > with most of their published results.

    >
    > I think you're referring to the "research" put forward by the big
    > business mouthpieces. Most of academia are agreed that software
    > patenting is bad.


    We're talking about patents in general here, not software patents. Most
    of academia agree that patents are a good thing.


    --
    --Tim Smith

  2. Re: Basic Economics Lesson for [H]omer (was Re: The "right" to "own"knowledge)

    Tim Smith wrote:
    > In article ,
    > "Phil Da Lick!" wrote:
    >>> Really? You should write a paper on this and publish it. I'm sure the
    >>> world's economists would be interested in your research, as it disagrees
    >>> with most of their published results.

    >> I think you're referring to the "research" put forward by the big
    >> business mouthpieces. Most of academia are agreed that software
    >> patenting is bad.

    >
    > We're talking about patents in general here, not software patents. Most
    > of academia agree that patents are a good thing.
    >
    >


    We're disucssing software patents.

  3. Re: Basic Economics Lesson for [H]omer (was Re: The "right" to "own" knowledge)

    In article ,
    "Phil Da Lick!" wrote:
    > > We're talking about patents in general here, not software patents. Most
    > > of academia agree that patents are a good thing.
    > >
    > >

    >
    > We're disucssing software patents.


    No, we are discussing patent systems in general. Use the command in
    your newsreader to view the ancestral posts in the thread to get up to
    speed on what we are talking about here.


    --
    --Tim Smith

  4. Re: Basic Economics Lesson for [H]omer (was Re: The "right" to "own"knowledge)

    Tim Smith wrote:
    > In article ,
    > "Phil Da Lick!" wrote:
    >>> We're talking about patents in general here, not software patents. Most
    >>> of academia agree that patents are a good thing.
    >>>
    >>>

    >> We're disucssing software patents.

    >
    > No, we are discussing patent systems in general. Use the command in
    > your newsreader to view the ancestral posts in the thread to get up to
    > speed on what we are talking about here.
    >


    This is exactly the same tactic big software businesses use to justify
    software patents.

  5. Re: Basic Economics Lesson for [H]omer (was Re: The "right" to "own" knowledge)

    In article ,
    "Phil Da Lick!" wrote:
    > >>> We're talking about patents in general here, not software patents. Most
    > >>> of academia agree that patents are a good thing.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >> We're disucssing software patents.

    > >
    > > No, we are discussing patent systems in general. Use the command in
    > > your newsreader to view the ancestral posts in the thread to get up to
    > > speed on what we are talking about here.
    > >

    >
    > This is exactly the same tactic big software businesses use to justify
    > software patents.


    Big software businesses justify software patents by suggesting you look
    at prior posts in the thread so you'll understand what we are talking
    about?

    --
    --Tim Smith

  6. Re: Basic Economics Lesson for [H]omer (was Re: The "right" to "own"knowledge)

    Tim Smith wrote:
    > In article ,
    > "Phil Da Lick!" wrote:
    >>>>> We're talking about patents in general here, not software patents. Most
    >>>>> of academia agree that patents are a good thing.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>> We're disucssing software patents.
    >>> No, we are discussing patent systems in general. Use the command in
    >>> your newsreader to view the ancestral posts in the thread to get up to
    >>> speed on what we are talking about here.
    >>>

    >> This is exactly the same tactic big software businesses use to justify
    >> software patents.

    >
    > Big software businesses justify software patents by suggesting you look
    > at prior posts in the thread so you'll understand what we are talking
    > about?
    >


    By blurring the lines and comparing apples and oranges.

  7. Re: Basic Economics Lesson for [H]omer (was Re: The "right" to "own" knowledge)

    Phil Da Lick! wrote:
    > Tim Smith wrote:
    >> "Phil Da Lick!" wrote:
    >>
    >>>>>> We're talking about patents in general here, not software patents.
    >>>>>> Most of academia agree that patents are a good thing.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> We're discussing software patents.
    >>>>
    >>>> No, we are discussing patent systems in general. Use the command in
    >>>> your newsreader to view the ancestral posts in the thread to get up
    >>>> to speed on what we are talking about here.
    >>>
    >>> This is exactly the same tactic big software businesses use to justify
    >>> software patents.

    >>
    >> Big software businesses justify software patents by suggesting you look
    >> at prior posts in the thread so you'll understand what we are talking
    >> about?
    >>

    > By blurring the lines and comparing apples and oranges.


    You are talking to FUD-meister wannabee Timmy. Of course the discussion
    was about software patents:

    Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2008 02:56:14 +0100
    From: Homer
    Message-ID:
    Subject: The "right" to "own" knowledge

    Two people on opposite sides of the world have exactly the same idea at
    the same time. Which one of those two people would be most morally
    justified in claiming to own the exclusive rights to that idea?

    Should it be the first to dash through the doors of the USPTO office, with
    a big wad of cash in his hand? [....]

    This is the essence of Free Software.
    Then Timmy changed the subject to "Basic Economics Lesson for [H]omer" ....

    He is just another distraction artist (usenet graffiti hound).

    --
    HPT

+ Reply to Thread