|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 29 2012 @ 02:32 PM EST |
It is pointless because it is an obscure rationale for taking an action that
policymakers are not currently interested in taking. You are pushing a rope.
It accomplishes nothing.
What you need to do is make a compelling argument that the impact of software
patents is negative, from a public policy perspective.
If policymakers wanted to abolish software patents they would simply amend
current law to clearly state that software inventions are not patentable.
They've done this in other areas, for policy reasons. For example, surgical
procedures.
No one cares about semiotics. Policymakers need to hear the public policy
argument. I doubt you can point to a single piece of legislation, in this
country or any other, that was advanced based on semiotic arguments. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|