|
|
|
| Authored by: NigelWhitley on Friday, July 12 2013 @ 10:20 AM EDT |
Many English words do indeed derive from old Norse, not least the word
"law". From your response, you appear to have taken offence where none
was intended or (IMHO) warranted.
I was sincere in applauding you for choosing to post in what is not your native
language and mentioned that there may be some errors in translation but there
were also what I believe to be errors in reasoning.
I have no idea why you chose to make mention of England, the UK or the British
Isles and pointed that out in what I hoped was a friendly and jocular manner.
I explained that you took literally what I intended ironically and the title was
a reference to my own failing in using irony when that can be difficult for
someone else to identify. It's my natural way of speaking and I simply forget
it's not so easy to determine irony without the clues of intonation and body
language from a face-to-face encounter. If you took my response to be
patronising or mocking then that was not my intention. I was just trying to
clear up a misunderstanding by stating my position directly.
The final (big) paragraph is where I felt there was a possible example of
"poor reasoning" as I put it. I did my best to fit what I wrote to
what you claimed I had done but I could not. I commented on the closest match I
could find and argued why I didn't agree with your characterisation of it.
Further, you stated you had taken the time to read documents and then post (now
twice) over what you describe as "rather insignificant case in a strange
land with strange customs and a strange conception of common law". That's a
lot of effort for an "insignificant" "federal court case in a far
away place". From my perspective it involves two of the leading companies
in the field of mobile phones and tablets(the fastest growing area of personal
computing), the use of software patents (which I wholeheartedly agree make no
sense and have posted to that effect on more than one occasion) to protect
market share and the rather significant matter of over a billion dollars of
damages awarded.
I agree that, in an ideal world, this is a bad use of scarce judicial resources.
Unfortunately software patents are granted and enforced in some important
markets including the US so the outcome of this case may have consequences for
those, such as you and me, who have been in the industry for a long time. In
that context, this case may help to highlight just how badly broken the system
is and thereby lead to a more sane patent regime. That would ultimately save
resources of developers and courts so this may actually prove to be a good use
of resources (the cynic in me says not).
Iechyd da i chi hefyd. :-)
-------------------
Nigel Whitley[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
