<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2013/1/3 Richard Stallman <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rms@gnu.org" target="_blank">rms@gnu.org</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<a href="http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2012/intellectual-property-rights_en.htm" target="_blank">http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2012/intellectual-property-rights_en.htm</a><br>
is a sleazy propaganda attack on patent law in the EU.<br>
<br>
The central premise of this consultation is that copyright law and<br>
patent law (and several other laws) should be treated alike (or at<br>
least, more alike than now). It establishes this premise by taking it<br>
for granted in the act of llumping them together. It rehearses people<br>
in this misguided conceptual practice by having them answer dozens of<br>
questions, each of which is based on lumping them together.<br>
<br>
I think this needs to be denounced as brainwashing. Is anyone<br>
interested?<br></blockquote><div><br>Yes, I think it must be denounced and I am interested in doing so <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
The questionnaire is aimed primarily at those enforcing copyrights,<br>
patents, and various other unrelated privileges -- so there is no use<br>
responding to it.<br></blockquote><div><br>As Amelia (rightly, to my mind) pointed out, while we can agree that the questionnaire is biased, there is no point in ignoring it, since doing so just contributes to make our point ignored. <br>
<br>I think your position is well worth to be kept in mind while answering each and every question of the questionnaire (and it deserves to de highlighted in other fora). It would be great if you could help us to phrase the answers in a way that exposes this flaw but doesn't ignore everything else. As thinghs are now, I think we should try to answer massively this questionnaire. In this particular occasion, making our point N times will be better than making it none, methinks.<br>
</div><br></div>