there are at least … there are at least two reasons why you can win any big player. One of them is that big players tend to screw a good idea by bloating it with features and creating an absolutely unusable portal. Second - there are too many ideas around. One thing to note idea, another to actually implement it. So quit worrying, just do things.
what you need to … what you need to understand is it takes a lot of cash to take a patent at least one million bucks richard stallman guarantees that no one can restrict u from taking part of the source code and u cant restrict anyone look at the general public license or free documentation license
The fundamental … The fundamental premise of knowledge all through history and different cultures has been, if you understand it you own it. Free software is an extension of that concept.
I was somewhat … I was somewhat disappointed when I found out that there must be a physical embodiment of a system before it can be patented. I just had an innovative idea for the web, and the thing is that if I come out with it, major players like yahoo and google can just copy the idea easily, given their resources and drive me out of the market, which really scares me. So I really see the patent as a saving force, if this sort of idea could be patented. But sadly.. no.
They are patents on … They are patents on ideas and yes many are from years of research and investment. Most come out of the research department. Sure a song is copyright, but you still can’t take a piece of that song and use it. Patents have protected companies from monopolies when a small company didn’t have a product but had an idea there are instances where this protected this small company from being trampled over by Microsoft.
Missing the point. … Missing the point. Whether or not you like the software, GNU was started by Stallman, and that in itself deserves some recognition.
You are confusing … You are confusing software patents and copyright law. They are not the same thing. Any musician, writer or programmer automatically owns the copyright to his/her own work to do with, sell, give away, or license as they please. No one is arguing against this.
“Patents are an … “Patents are an incentive for companies to invest in research”
The opposite is true and has been amply demonstrated in the IT industry worldwide. Software patents are not being used to protect any inventor but to advance the interests of corporations who will use any means to thwart fair competition.
The patents these corporations lay claim to are not the result of “years of investment”, they are frivolous claims aimed at stifling competition.
BTW, this isn’t … BTW, this isn’t even grounded to programming. I mean look at music, they copywrite their tunes, if a musician comes up with a riff, he owns it and no one can use it without paying him. Why? It’s so simple to just come up with a riff! Just like an algorithm. Yet even Ice Tea got sued for taking Queen and Bowie’s riff into his song. JK Rowling is putting a ban on harry potter look alikes, why? anyone could invent a boy wizard.
Patents are an … Patents are an incentive for companies to invest in research. If a company cannot see any return on years of investment into a project and some random idiot can just use what they actually paid a lot of money to research and produce over several years there is no insentive for progress unless it is fear of being killed by the furur. Keruaran, perhaps you would be more happy in nazi germany
Linux was not … Linux was not Torvalds idea even, he copied the idea from unix, and he actually copied the idea of unix on PC via minix, so nothing original.
Then you mention garbage. GNU debugger? please, the aboslute worst debugger in existance. Emacs? lol
Ya, you can get a … Ya, you can get a job like cleaning bathroom stalls! I wouldn’t compare handling F*ing servers with programming positions, it’s not the same stuff.
Repeating the same … Repeating the same strawman argument again.
And it is corporate fascism to try and use a broken patent system to stifle innovation and development of free software projects simply because they threaten your bottom line.
When Microsoft tells you free software is a threat to the industry, what they’re really saying is that its a threat to Microsoft’s business model and bottom line. They don’t like real competition and they’ll go to any lengths to protect their monopoly.
Perhaps you think … Perhaps you think Pythagoris should have patented his theorem. Perhaps you think your children should not be allowed to learn mathematics in school but rather be forced to buy some ‘mathematics product’ from a corporation who will call them pirates if they do math themselves.
Linux might have … Linux might have been written by Linus Torvalds, but the GNU project was started by Richard Stallman.
To claim that he doesn’t have any of his own ideas is just plain stupid. He wasn’t just recognized for his ideas, but also for his skills as a developer. Ever heard of the GNU Debugger, GCC, Emacs etc?
yes, but computer … yes, but computer people can get a job like handling servers, computer workstations and all different kinds of Computer Science jobs
making closed-source programs would be my very-last choice
Richard Stallman intervention against software patents 2004
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
examples please? …
examples please? who was saved by patents from Microsoft?
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
there are at least …
there are at least two reasons why you can win any big player. One of them is that big players tend to screw a good idea by bloating it with features and creating an absolutely unusable portal. Second - there are too many ideas around. One thing to note idea, another to actually implement it. So quit worrying, just do things.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
what you need to …
what you need to understand is it takes a lot of cash to take a patent at least one million bucks richard stallman guarantees that no one can restrict u from taking part of the source code and u cant restrict anyone look at the general public license or free documentation license
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
The fundamental …
The fundamental premise of knowledge all through history and different cultures has been, if you understand it you own it. Free software is an extension of that concept.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
“given their …
“given their resources and drive me out of the market, which really scares me. So I really see the patent as a saving force”
Check out part 5 at about four minutes 15 seconds and for a minute or two to see how it doesn’t save “the small guy” from the “big guys” in the least.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
I was somewhat …
I was somewhat disappointed when I found out that there must be a physical embodiment of a system before it can be patented. I just had an innovative idea for the web, and the thing is that if I come out with it, major players like yahoo and google can just copy the idea easily, given their resources and drive me out of the market, which really scares me. So I really see the patent as a saving force, if this sort of idea could be patented. But sadly.. no.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
They are patents on …
They are patents on ideas and yes many are from years of research and investment. Most come out of the research department. Sure a song is copyright, but you still can’t take a piece of that song and use it. Patents have protected companies from monopolies when a small company didn’t have a product but had an idea there are instances where this protected this small company from being trampled over by Microsoft.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
Patents != …
Patents != copyright.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
Missing the point. …
Missing the point. Whether or not you like the software, GNU was started by Stallman, and that in itself deserves some recognition.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
You are confusing …
You are confusing software patents and copyright law. They are not the same thing. Any musician, writer or programmer automatically owns the copyright to his/her own work to do with, sell, give away, or license as they please. No one is arguing against this.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
“Patents are an …
“Patents are an incentive for companies to invest in research”
The opposite is true and has been amply demonstrated in the IT industry worldwide. Software patents are not being used to protect any inventor but to advance the interests of corporations who will use any means to thwart fair competition.
The patents these corporations lay claim to are not the result of “years of investment”, they are frivolous claims aimed at stifling competition.
Your Nazi Germany quip is entirely nonsensical.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
BTW, this isn’t …
BTW, this isn’t even grounded to programming. I mean look at music, they copywrite their tunes, if a musician comes up with a riff, he owns it and no one can use it without paying him. Why? It’s so simple to just come up with a riff! Just like an algorithm. Yet even Ice Tea got sued for taking Queen and Bowie’s riff into his song. JK Rowling is putting a ban on harry potter look alikes, why? anyone could invent a boy wizard.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
Patents are an …
Patents are an incentive for companies to invest in research. If a company cannot see any return on years of investment into a project and some random idiot can just use what they actually paid a lot of money to research and produce over several years there is no insentive for progress unless it is fear of being killed by the furur. Keruaran, perhaps you would be more happy in nazi germany
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
Linux was not …
Linux was not Torvalds idea even, he copied the idea from unix, and he actually copied the idea of unix on PC via minix, so nothing original.
Then you mention garbage. GNU debugger? please, the aboslute worst debugger in existance. Emacs? lol
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
Ya, you can get a …
Ya, you can get a job like cleaning bathroom stalls! I wouldn’t compare handling F*ing servers with programming positions, it’s not the same stuff.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
Same repetitive …
Same repetitive strawman again…
Are you a parrot ?
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
Repeating the same …
Repeating the same strawman argument again.
And it is corporate fascism to try and use a broken patent system to stifle innovation and development of free software projects simply because they threaten your bottom line.
When Microsoft tells you free software is a threat to the industry, what they’re really saying is that its a threat to Microsoft’s business model and bottom line. They don’t like real competition and they’ll go to any lengths to protect their monopoly.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
Strawman argument. …
Strawman argument. No one is arguing that you shouldn’t be paid for your labours.
Try again.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
You don’t have any …
You don’t have any idea. Period.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
Perhaps you think …
Perhaps you think Pythagoris should have patented his theorem. Perhaps you think your children should not be allowed to learn mathematics in school but rather be forced to buy some ‘mathematics product’ from a corporation who will call them pirates if they do math themselves.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
Who said anybody …
Who said anybody should work for free ?
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
Linux might have …
Linux might have been written by Linus Torvalds, but the GNU project was started by Richard Stallman.
To claim that he doesn’t have any of his own ideas is just plain stupid. He wasn’t just recognized for his ideas, but also for his skills as a developer. Ever heard of the GNU Debugger, GCC, Emacs etc?
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
Ever heard of Linus …
Ever heard of Linus Torvalds?
Ever heard of UNIX?
Point set match.
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
Richard Stallman …
Richard Stallman has none of his own ideas?
Ever hear of Linux?
June 21st, 2009 at 7:24 am
yes, but computer …
yes, but computer people can get a job like handling servers, computer workstations and all different kinds of Computer Science jobs
making closed-source programs would be my very-last choice