Desktop platforms Toolkit

Story: Gates: Restricting IP rights is tantamount to communism

• 
• 

An interesting debate Brent, but I still fundamentally disagree with you.

You can have your philosphic argument on what 'rights' are. In my view, whether the state itself owns rights, or allows another entity to control them amounts to the same effect. And that is, a chilling effect on innovation. Why invent a better mousetrap when you hold the patent and your customers have no choice but to buy the one you choose to sell? Your competitors are legally prevented from selling a superior mousetrap.

"The conceprt of a "right" pertains to action - specifically, to freedom of action. What does the idea of "state controlled" rights imply? It means that the state may take away this freedom to action. One who has freedom of action at times, which may be revoked at any other time by the whim of the state, is acting by permission, not by right."

In exactly the same way, the private holder of IP rights can take away the freedom to action of others using their IP.

"As far as what Gates' desired outcomes are, I cannot say, but neither can anyone else. I can note, however, that not once does he advocate the abolishion of open source in the present article."

Come off it. Of course he isn't going to outright say something like that. But you seem to be an intelligent man. Are you really unable to see the intent? This is all about FUD.

"And stating that IBM makes money from open source strengthens my argument. I said open source needs the backing of companies to go somewhere. IBM is giving Linux tremendous credibilty and is a beneficial ally."

Thats not quite what you said before in your first post. You clearly implied that Open Source was fun, but would go nowhere without backing from companies who could protect IP rights.

There is no explicit link between the two. IBM make money from open source by selling related products and services. That has nothing to do with IP rights.

• 
• 

• 
• 
• 

Full Talkback thread