Re: Patents again

[threeseas]

Abdullah Ramazanoglu wrote:
> begin  threeseas dedi ki:
>
> > Abdullah Ramazanoglu wrote:
> >
> > > begin  Paul Jarc dedi ki:
>
>   --8<--
>
>
> > > A patented idea can be implemented in a project haphazardly, yes, but it
> > > would be spotty and probably easy to deal with. But a deliberate, covert
> > > plan would provide for a systematic, mass corruption substantially more
> > > difficult to deal with. ....
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > and a deliberte, covert plan would also leave a trail of evidence....
> >
> > do you really think the justice system is so corrupt that it could 
> > ignore such intent to harm others or their works by such deception?
>
>
> If you give it a second thought from a wider perspective, then the whole
> software patents question should have not existed in the first place
> today, if one had to trust the justice (sub)system. Why should I have to
> trust the whole basket of eggs to justice subsystem exclusively, instead
> of (or in addition to) taking proper care of my own self?


wasn't sure what you were trying to say here.

but isn't the real failure that of computer science and its financial 
carrot distraction and detour away from the purity of abstraction 
physics research?

in other words, the legal system doesn't even try to deny the earth 
revolves around the sun, as it is a scientific established fact. 
However, it wasn't until sometime in, IIRC, 1990 that the catholic curch 
finally exonerated (sp?) Galelio (sp?) --- alot of fu&in good it did him 
now..... but doing so really only served the church, which was losing 
members.

The legal system, is that church or state? lately here in the south (US) 
news media, its becomming grey matter again..... like monkey brains....

anyways..... even when the church still held to the belief that Galelio 
was wrong and a heritic (pre 1990), the legal system did not question 
whether the earth revolved around the sun, but took it as scientific 
fact, whos larger body of the government was involved in making use of 
the knowledge thru the space program. And today we have a commercial 
race for space travel.... leading to cheaper and safer methods.

So again, where is the scientific basis by which to judge what the hell 
software is that we might establish a fair and usable system of IP 
rights assignment that makes sence and doesn't constrain the human right 
to advance thru creation of better things?