Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leightonwell, i believed that patents would do the job exactly as actually
turns out that Certification Marks (the twin brother of Trade Marks)
actually does.
so what i intend to do hasn't changed, but people's *understanding*
has changed.
Well, the means of doing things may also have changed, too. ;-)
Post by Luke Kenneth Casson LeightonPost by Paul BoddieSince then, I think your policies (and associates)
my *former* associates turned out be a a bunch of short-sighted
financially-motivated individuals who would do whatever it takes to
make profits first, disregarding all and any principles and goals
required in order to achieve those profits.
Sorry, I meant to indicate that they were your associates at the time, not
your current associates.
Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton*my* policies, principles and goals haven't changed: they're just now
better understood.
Post by Paul Boddiehave changed and that you're aiming to go down the
trademark-plus-certification route to avoid unsafe clones bringing the
initiative into disrepute
... and to protect people from being injured or killed by unsafe
clones: yes absolutely. that has always always been the goal, even
when i believed that patents would be the means by which that could be
achieved: turns out that it's Registered Certification Marks that are
the better vehicle.
Post by Paul Boddie(which I also imagine is a lot more viable a
strategy, anyway).
it's always been the strategy, paul.
Sure, I believe this. I was just puzzled about anyone using patents to achieve
this goal, though, because patents seem to cost real money to keep up (at
least according to people I know who in their work have filed them, only to
give up on renewing them because of the financial burden, subject to my
partial recollection of various conversations). That may be true of things
like trademarks (and other marks), too, but when people apply for those, it's
quite clear what they have in mind, and I presume that they are also more
effective when any kind of infringement occurs.
Post by Luke Kenneth Casson LeightonPost by Paul BoddieI'll gladly update the above page to clarify the situation
if this is indeed the case. :-)
yes please, i didn't realise that there was a page which mis-advised
people based on a misunderstanding of what i said. i believe i can
say that safely (without offense paul!) because (a) you find the
certification marks explanation acceptable but the patents one not and
(b) i do recall endeavouring to make it clear, but really: there's
*really* nothing new or different between what i said four years ago
and six months ago [apart from the tool four years ago was patents,
and the tool six months ago was certification marks]. *really*. so,
from (a) and (b), we can logically and rationally deduce that there
must have been a complete misunderstanding.
OK. I'll update the page and clarify the situation. In fact, given the level
of interest in this initiative, I think it's probably a good idea to have a
separate page about such topics, anyway, and that might allow for a longer
explanation about what you had in mind.
Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leightonwhat i do remember though about the conversation four years ago was
that there were a lot of people really "not getting it". also, i am
keenly aware that there is a huge aversion to patents in the software
libre community, as they tend to be severely abused, lending an aura
of "total automatic distrust" of the inventors. as a result of that
abuse we know that there are now several linux patent groups formed: i
recall that it was almost *demanded* of me to transfer full
responsibility and control of the patents to those groups! groups who
have *no way* to fully grok the scope of this project.
Well, patents are effectively monopolies, but unlike things like copyrights
and trademarks they violate various principles that people regard as being
central to notions of justice and fairness. For example, you can unknowingly
infringe some patent and be held responsible whereas such things are pretty
much impossible with copyrights (your code, independently developed, ends up
being the same as an existing work) or trademarks (your product's logo happens
to look almost exactly like the logo of some other product or initiative in
the same commercial field).
So, any fear of patents is particularly valid and understandable, I feel, and
it's why various open hardware groups have tried to regulate patents in a way
similar to that done by copyleft licensing. Meanwhile, the various patent-
sharing groups, although having something of a protective effect, don't really
attempt to address the underlying problem, partly because various member
organisations of these groups happen to like what patents have to offer their
businesses.
Your perspective on patents is probably different from mine, and I'm not going
to try and convince you to change your perspective, however. But for those of
us who cannot just regard patents as tools, it is very positive that you're
choosing different tools (that also happen to be more widely understood and
accepted for the purpose in question) to achieve your objectives.
Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leightonsince then, if you recall, when i entrusted responsibility for
getting the MEB crowdfunded to a third party with good software libre
credentials, i had to fight to keep it on track, even to the extent of
posting very embarrassing public corrections on their forums due to
them making unauthorised committments about changes and additions to
the standard that, if implemented, would throw the *entire* standard
into disrepute.
I have to admit that I didn't follow the forums in question (which I guess
were something to do with Improv).
Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leightonso with that as just one example that i - all of us - learned from, i
think you can see why it is not safe to entrust anything like patents
or trademarks to any other third party... yet. *once this is all
established* and running safely, then yes i will set up a foundation,
with strict rules, find some appropriate directors, and leave it in
their hands. but that will be several years yet.
Fair enough.
Paul
_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large