On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 11:16:13AM -0500, Bryan J. Smith wrote: > I think you're confusing implementations with concepts. Movies are not > patentable. New innovations in movie technology are. That's why You can get patents on better projectors but not on "space movies" or "epic battle where hero loses a leg" .. You can get patents on processors but not on programs (at least in most of the world) > that was only 3-4 years behind. That is more than understandable. The > community has never had the right to ownership to cutting-edge concepts, > at least not without the research burden that goes with it. Nobody has a right to "own" ideas. Al the countries that have patents do so because they recognized the need to make a pact between the people and the creator and to distort both markets and natural order in order to foster progress (in theory). > > Ah yes. Rights to justice, drinking water, not to be shot without a trial > > (except if you look foreign) ... > > So you believe rights to software are an inalienable right? No I'm just pointing out that the evil federal mandates include good things 8) But this is getting off topic so I'll shut up Alan -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
