<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: EU commission takes another shot at software patents</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.fsfe.org/tonnerre/archives/42/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.fsfe.org/tonnerre/archives/42</link>
	<description>FFII's coordinator for Switzerland</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2011 08:36:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: WMS</title>
		<link>http://blogs.fsfe.org/tonnerre/archives/42/comment-page-1#comment-4043</link>
		<dc:creator>WMS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Feb 2011 08:05:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.fsfe.org/tonnerre/?p=42#comment-4043</guid>
		<description>I would like to address the writer of this article. I have read a fragment of your work but unfortunately, I can not understand anything that I have read. What do you mean by patent in software? I want to know more about the failure of introducing the software in Europe. What factors made the marketing to fail?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would like to address the writer of this article. I have read a fragment of your work but unfortunately, I can not understand anything that I have read. What do you mean by patent in software? I want to know more about the failure of introducing the software in Europe. What factors made the marketing to fail?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tonnerre</title>
		<link>http://blogs.fsfe.org/tonnerre/archives/42/comment-page-1#comment-33</link>
		<dc:creator>tonnerre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 May 2009 19:16:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.fsfe.org/tonnerre/?p=42#comment-33</guid>
		<description>Dear Mr. Halling,

While your argument does explain reasons to implement a specific solution in software rather than hardware, you failed to point out the flaw in the logic. The investment into the software implementation of the solution is still fully covered by Copyright, so there is no reason such a broad claim as a patent would have to be applied.

Had the solution indeed been implemented in hardware entirely, then there would potentially have been an investment in form of pre-release ASICs and other overhead which may not be covered appropriately by applicable law other than patent law; I admit to not having considered that case fully as it is not related to a software implementation and thus out of the scope of this discussion.

Fact is that investments in software do not exceed those covered by copyright, which is what I was stating.

Kind regards,
Tonnerre Lombard</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Mr. Halling,</p>
<p>While your argument does explain reasons to implement a specific solution in software rather than hardware, you failed to point out the flaw in the logic. The investment into the software implementation of the solution is still fully covered by Copyright, so there is no reason such a broad claim as a patent would have to be applied.</p>
<p>Had the solution indeed been implemented in hardware entirely, then there would potentially have been an investment in form of pre-release ASICs and other overhead which may not be covered appropriately by applicable law other than patent law; I admit to not having considered that case fully as it is not related to a software implementation and thus out of the scope of this discussion.</p>
<p>Fact is that investments in software do not exceed those covered by copyright, which is what I was stating.</p>
<p>Kind regards,<br />
Tonnerre Lombard</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dale B. Halling</title>
		<link>http://blogs.fsfe.org/tonnerre/archives/42/comment-page-1#comment-32</link>
		<dc:creator>Dale B. Halling</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 May 2009 00:00:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.fsfe.org/tonnerre/?p=42#comment-32</guid>
		<description>The arguments against software patents have a fundamental flaw.  As any electrical engineer knows, solutions to problems implemented in software can also be realized in hardware, i.e., electronic circuits.  The main reason for choosing a software solution is the ease in implementing changes, the main reason for choosing a hardware solution is speed of processing.  Therefore, a time critical solution is more likely to be implemented in hardware.  While a solution that requires the ability to add features easily will be implemented in software.  As a result, to be intellectually consistent those people against software patents also have to be against patents for electronic circuits.  For more information on patents and innovation see www.hallingblog.com.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The arguments against software patents have a fundamental flaw.  As any electrical engineer knows, solutions to problems implemented in software can also be realized in hardware, i.e., electronic circuits.  The main reason for choosing a software solution is the ease in implementing changes, the main reason for choosing a hardware solution is speed of processing.  Therefore, a time critical solution is more likely to be implemented in hardware.  While a solution that requires the ability to add features easily will be implemented in software.  As a result, to be intellectually consistent those people against software patents also have to be against patents for electronic circuits.  For more information on patents and innovation see <a href="http://www.hallingblog.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.hallingblog.com</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Knuth Tells Europe to Let Him “Innovate in Peace” (Without Software Patents) &#124; All about MICROSOFT</title>
		<link>http://blogs.fsfe.org/tonnerre/archives/42/comment-page-1#comment-25</link>
		<dc:creator>Knuth Tells Europe to Let Him “Innovate in Peace” (Without Software Patents) &#124; All about MICROSOFT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2009 19:01:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.fsfe.org/tonnerre/?p=42#comment-25</guid>
		<description>[...] addition to this, someone from The Free Software Foundation Europe provided the following explanation for the needlessness of software patents. [via Digital Majority]  The big problem with regard to [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] addition to this, someone from The Free Software Foundation Europe provided the following explanation for the needlessness of software patents. [via Digital Majority]  The big problem with regard to [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Knuth Tells Europe to Let Him “Innovate in Peace” (Without Software Patents) &#124; Boycott Novell</title>
		<link>http://blogs.fsfe.org/tonnerre/archives/42/comment-page-1#comment-24</link>
		<dc:creator>Knuth Tells Europe to Let Him “Innovate in Peace” (Without Software Patents) &#124; Boycott Novell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2009 18:48:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.fsfe.org/tonnerre/?p=42#comment-24</guid>
		<description>[...] addition to this, someone from The Free Software Foundation Europe provided the following explanation for the needlessness of software patents. [via Digital Majority]  The big problem with regard to [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] addition to this, someone from The Free Software Foundation Europe provided the following explanation for the needlessness of software patents. [via Digital Majority]  The big problem with regard to [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

