Interesting People mailing list archives
more on Google, Kaaza, and patent fairness
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 09:45:20 -0400
Begin forwarded message: From: "RJR RJRiley.com" <RJR () RJRILEY com> Date: September 7, 2006 9:30:51 AM EDT To: dave () farber net Cc: "'Krulwich'" <krulwich () yahoo com> Subject: RE: Google, Kaaza, and patent fairness Dave, for IP if you wish. I agree that copyright owners deserve fair compensation. First, I believe that most copyright does not create new wealth as do inventions. Generally copyright only shifts wealth from one pocket to another. I have known many top inventors. Dr. Damadian (MRI), Wilson Greatbatch(Pacemaker), Gordon Gould (Laser), Gertrude Elion (Leukemia treatment and other inventions), and Jim Fergason (LCD) to name a few. The value of those inventions are incalculable. What is a movie or song worth to society? Is
there any comparison? Second, I think that the priorities are backwards. Copyrights have very robust protections, protections which have steadily increased while the ability to protect patents is much more limited.Third, I think that the term of protection for copyright is far too long.
Most certainly copyrights deserve protection for a long enough period togive a reasonable return. How about twenty years or the life of the author, which ever is greater? The Mickey Mouse bill really was outrageous. DRM is
outrageous.Forth, I believe in fair use for both patents and copyright (i.e. research). The problem is that the copyright interests are attempting to force people to pay again and again for the same work. They are trying to kill all fair
use.Fifth, copyright interests are impeding innovation, not based on the merits but with abusive litigation. And many of the bigger copyright interests are campaigning to weaken inventor's rights while at the same time overreaching with their own rights. Copyright owners should be chasing infringers not crippling new technology. As an inventor I had to punish those whole steal,
not those who licensed. I expect copyright holders to live by the same standards. Just as we do not punish people for what they might do, we should not punish the public at large for what a few do.I am deeply disturbed by the actions of companies like Apple and their iPod. The truth of the matter is Apple is not a great innovator today. They did a good job of packaging others inventions and of marketing, but they really
did nothing to advance the collective arts. I also do not understand why anyone would by music which is locked in apropriety format. I sure will not. When I pay for a product I do not expect to be forced to watch commercials as is the case with DVD. I rarely go to theaters anymore because they force me to listen to deathening commercials. I can and will do without products like these. Besides, most of movies are
drivel.I do not mind paying for rights, but I will only do so once for any given work. I will not purchase products which unreasonably restrict my ability to use those products. I will not purchase software with copy protection. I have a right to make backups and if I cannot backup one product I look for an alternative. I will not pay for subscription software unless there is
valuable and constantly updated data which merits ongoing payments. Ronald J Riley, Exec. Dir. Ronald J Riley, PresidentInventorEd, Inc. Professional Inventors Alliance
www.InventorEd.org www.PIAUSA.org RJR"at"InvEd.org RJR"at"PIAUSA.org Change "at" to @ Change "at" to @ RJR Direct # (202) 318-1595 ________________________________ From: Krulwich [mailto:krulwich () yahoo com] Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 5:19 AM To: dave () farber net Cc: RJR () RJRILEY com Subject: Google, Kaaza, and patent fairnessRegarding the comment below about Microsoft and Google feeling that they can "take others intellectual property for virtually nothing," I find it very ironic that many of the same people who are in favor of stopping Microsoft
and Google from violating patent rights are also in favor of p2p systems letting them take musician and movie maker's IP for "virtually" nothing. Isn't it the case that musicians and movie makers are the source ofinnovation in the entertainment industry? Don't they deserve IP protection
and renumeration for their work as much as tech startups? --Bruce Both have a legislative agenda to tip the balance of the patent system in favor of vested interests like themselves. This will be at the expense of individual inventors and their small companies who are and always have been the source of the bulk of breakthrough inventions. I will try to get time to publish a list of companies who are members of the Coalition for Patent Fairness, aka. The Coalition for Patent Piracy. The Coalition's idea of "fair" is being able to take others property for virtually nothing. ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- more on Google, Kaaza, and patent fairness David Farber (Sep 07)