• From: Kay Michael <Michael.Kay@i...>
• To: "'Clark C. Evans'" <cce@c...>, Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
• Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 18:23:02 +0100

>Third, perhaps the term for patents should be set on a 
>per-patent basis? 

Copyright too... If copyright were to expire after a million copies have
been sold, the developer would still get a fair return and anti-trust trials
would be unnecessary.

Mike Kay

***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@x...&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
***************************************************************************

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Software patent debate: we lose round one
    • From: "Clark C. Evans" <cce@c...>
  • Re: Software patent debate: we lose round one
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • RE: Software patent debate: we lose round one
    • From: Sebastian Rahtz <sebastian.rahtz@c...>

• Prev by Date: Re: <!ELEMENT C (A,A)> allowed?
• Next by Date: RE: Software patent debate: we lose round one
• Previous by thread: RE: Software patent debate: we lose round one
• Next by thread: RE: Software patent debate: we lose round one
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread