Re: [ILUG] Patent issues
Colm MacCarthaigh <colm <at> stdlib.net>
2004-06-01 19:51:42 GMT
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 07:11:45PM +0100, John Gay wrote:
> > I would avoid mentioning MP3 if my ultimate aim was to convince
> > legislators of something. Also, a European company benefited from the
> > MP3 restrictions, so it loses some of the self-interest argument.
> This is a case of explaining the diference between the piracy that mp3 are
> most famous for and the actual uses of mp3. After all, it is derived from the
> mpeg standard for video compression. It's also integral to digital broadcasts
> and DVD formats. These are areas where the small guys are being pushed out by
> the patent issue.
Trust me, as a lobbyist, you really want to cut down the number of
complicated arguments you have to make. People are going to hear "MP3"
and form a mental association with copyright violation and filesharing
ththat you'll have to waste time getting them over. Do yourself a
favour and don't mention it in the first place.
> This is not pointless rhetoric, this is a very serious issue. Because no one
> could be bothered to say something before Ireland accepted the BBE (Big Brown
> Envelop) from a certain Redmond-based company and un-did over a years worth
> of campaining throughout Europe, we now have very little time to correct it.
It absolutely is pointless rhetoric, real lobbying works in the real
world, Email is almost entirely ineffective. And it won't serve you
well to cast the situation as the above, that big brown envelope was
8,000 jobs in the economy. These are serious economic matters, and to be
honest it's a lot less clear cut. Software patents would probably be
good for our economy in the short term, and you have to start seeing
thigns in such a narrow and zealous manner to have a hope of making a
good convincing argument.