[LINK] EU gives green light to software patents

[Deus Ex Machina]

Brendan Scott [brendansweb at optusnet.com.au] wrote:
> 
> When the State creates them through the passage of legislation, then you 
> can say they're granted by the State. When they exist independent of such 
> legislation, then you can't.  You can't, for example, say my property in my 
> pen is granted by the State.  

absolutely it is. your right to the pen exist as a cultural and legal fiction that
is enforced by you and the state. there is no invisible barier that stops me
taking your pen.

> You might argue all property is enforced by the State (though, I suspect 
> with varying degrees of success).

same thing. what the state grants the state protects.

>That property in objects are monopolies 
> or anti-competitive is a tough ask because of the extremely limited scope 
> of exclusive rights (ie the object in question) and ready availability of 
> substitutable goods.  However, you can't argue that that property is 
> granted by the State. 

there is nothing substitutable about a bit of land. there is even less
substitutable if it is required for a new bus transit lane. just ask
a hundred or so former home owners in blacktown. these people held a
clear monopoly over dirt over which was some prefered gov bus transit lane. the

fiction of title rapidly disapeared once the government decide it was in
the "public interest" for it to do so.

copyright is just as restrictive as land title. you have an clearly identified
thing which you are granted use of.  in the case of copyright its a
virtual thing of which you can make arbitrary instantiations, in the
case of land its ficitonal boundaries which are pegged to dirt. if somehow your block of land
slid into the neighbours block then you would have no right to move into
the neighbours block. the fiction of your boundaries is independent of the actual
dirt (or lack thereof) underneath it.

Vic