Re: Research Process Patenting

From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>
To: spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org
Subject: Re: Research Process Patenting
Date: 2007-07-23 18:20:10
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: spi-general

On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 01:46:29AM +0800, Tim Post wrote:
> Hello to all,
> I'm a bit concerned and I thought this as good a place as any to open
> the conversation.

Why do you think this is a good place to open this conversation? It
isn't: this isn't a legal forum, and we claim no special expertise in
patent law.

> I'm getting a little concerned about patents that cover a process of
> doing something.

Sorry, that ship has sailed. If you want to change that, you need to
lobby your government to try to get out of its treaty obligations.
As I understand it, such direct lobbying would also violate our tax
status; which is the other reason not to raise this issue here.

So please have this conversation elsewhere. There _are_ fora where
this issue has already been discussed in rather a lot of detail, so I
suspect a little time with Google would be something that would
benefit you.


Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
The plural of anecdote is not data.
--Roger Brinner


Browse spi-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2007-07-23 22:05:07 Re: Research Process Patenting
Previous Message Tim Post 2007-07-23 17:46:29 Research Process Patenting