Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

White House Responds To Software Patents Petition

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the yes-we-can-maybe dept.

Patents 276

New submitter obliv!on writes "As previously discussed, the White House has started to reply to petitions on their 'We the People' website. They've now replied to the petition asking for an end to software patents. The response mentions the America Invents Act and encourages the use of the USPTO's open implementation website. Quoting: 'There's a lot we can do through the new law to improve patent quality and to ensure that only true inventions are given patent protection. But it's important to note that the executive branch doesn't set the boundaries of what is patentable all by itself. Congress has set forth broad categories of inventions that are eligible for patent protection. The courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, have interpreted the statute to include some software-related inventions.' The response goes on to denote some open source and open data initiatives in government. It's nice to hear that the administration understands 'concerns that overly broad patents on software-based inventions may stifle the very innovative and creative open source software development community.' However, the overall response redirects action to the petitioners through participating in the open implementation site and contacting Congress, instead of a promise to prepare additional legislative measures for Congress to consider on behalf of the petitioners."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I've got to hand it to the administration (5, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910374)

That's the most politely-worded and voluminous "Fuck you, you're on your own" I've ever read.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (4, Insightful)

24-bit Voxel (672674) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910424)

One can't help but wonder why they would ever have opened up these channels of communication. What did they expect to get as concerns? Technically the Executive has no power to do anything about any of this, so why bother with the dialogue? Every issue has to be resolved in the other two branches, so what did they hope to accomplish?

Unless of course they're just compiling a list...

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (5, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910484)

It's just a political stunt to make it look like the Obama administration gives a shit. Obama has belatedly realized that he might actually need his base to come out and vote for him next year, so he's been putting on a big show of late. It's the same with the "Jobs Bill." He knows it stands no chance getting past the Republicans in the House (hell, he couldn't even get it through the Democrats in the Senate). But it makes it *look* like he's doing something.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (4, Funny)

jez9999 (618189) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910574)

It's the same with the "Jobs Bill." He knows it stands no chance getting past the Republicans in the House (hell, he couldn't even get it through the Democrats in the Senate). But it makes it *look* like he's doing something.

And even with that he's just trying to ride on the tailcoats of a much-loved former CEO.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37910778)

Bill Jobs? That sounds like the CEO of an extremely evil company.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

newcastlejon (1483695) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911374)

You see? This is why punctuation is important!

Somehow, Jobs' Bill sounds frightful. :P

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (2)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910892)

Yep....

This site, obviously isn't about 'change' or truly addressing topics the people want addressed. It is theater....and all you're gonna get is mild responses, basically telling you what the law/policy is now and why they want to keep it that way.

They're never gonna do shit....we the people are far too unwashed, and ignorant to know what we want and need for ourselves.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (4, Insightful)

SlippyToad (240532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910994)

It's the same with the "Jobs Bill." He knows it stands no chance getting past the Republicans in the House

Yeah, but now those arrogant sons of whores have to actually come out and vote against a jobs bill. Instead of idiotically grandstanding about so-called "job creators" and doing FUCK-ALL about the economy.

Given the GOP's response vs. Obama's response, I'll take the Obama approach any day, thank you. Vs. the aristocratic, arrogant, self-centered ASSHOLE approach of the GOP, which is to repeatedly do the same thing that hasn't worked for over a decade, and then stand there with their insufferable smug prick-face smiles while the rest of us drown.

I guess it comes down to whose concerns you are going to listen to. The 1%, or the rest of us.

Software patents are somewhere about 1,000,000 miles down the coast from just getting a basic dialogue going in this country among the elite that JOBS GROW THE ECONOMY, NOT RICH PEOPLE.

So, I'm not sure I share the poutraged butt-hurt that the rest of slashdot does over this issue.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (3, Informative)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911050)

Yeah, but now those arrogant sons of whores have to actually come out and vote against a jobs bill.

From what I've read of it...while it does have a very few provisions that actually concern jobs...it is mostly a spending bill, labeled a jobs bill.

And hell, Obama can't even generate Democratic support enough in congress to pass it in the Senate, where they do still have a majority by the way.

So, it isn't all GOP as you ranted....the bill stinks to everyone in DC for the most part.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

Bucky24 (1943328) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911134)

the bill stinks to everyone in DC for the most part.

So then wouldn't that mean it's good for the rest of us? :D (I jest, I jest)

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

Worthless_Comments (987427) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911274)

"JOBS GROW THE ECONOMY, NOT RICH PEOPLE."

And you think....who creates those jobs? Poor people? Government?

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37911204)

Nice load of 'feed" you're trying to give us. Unfortunately the Jobs Bill got more than 50% of the vote, including most every democrat vote. The bad news is that it needs 66% of the vote (2/3, not half), and the republicans in that final 16% it needed voted against it, not the democrats. Keep beliving Rush "oxi" Limbaugh, and Bill O'Liely, if you want, but don't try to pool the wool over everyone else's eyes. You're not that good of a liar.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (2)

Jeng (926980) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910524)

It makes for a good campaign promise.

Out of all my dis-appointments with this administration, which actually isn't many dis-appointments, is that they are not taking the petitions seriously.

Instead of saying "I understand why you want the status quo changed and I will work on it." they are instead just telling us why the status quo is the way it is, with not even a hint of changing it.

If we wanted explanations we would read wikipedia, we want action.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1, Informative)

Godin21 (623535) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910670)

I thought we wanted change? Action was the previous administration.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

Jeng (926980) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910998)

In order to enact change action must occur.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

Bucky24 (1943328) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911162)

Well we did get the bailouts. I suppose if broken down that was a lot of small change....

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (2)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910562)

Well people complain that the government does not listen to their concerns. In this aspect they responded but correctly pointed to the correct part of the government that actually creates legislation. The administration could probably lead an initiative for reform but of course there will be the complaints that "Obama is for patent death panels" and how it is not the job of President to draft legislation.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911214)

In this aspect they responded but correctly pointed to the correct part of the government that actually creates legislation.

Oh for crying out loud. The president doesn't enact healthcare law, or pass the budget, or jobs bills, or defense spending or any number of other things. By pretending that they don't influence policy in the other two branches they are, as other people have pointed out, basically just saying "fuck you, we don't want to deal with it".

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37910600)

They're hoping for the "Won't someone save us from all our hard-earned money and liberty?" petition.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

Sir_Sri (199544) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910742)

The people who have enough money to be relevant have the whitehouse switchboard on speed dial, and get letters inviting them to fund-raising events that cost more per table than a minimum wage employee makes in a year.

If you think your money is hard earned try listening to one of these politician types beg for more money after you spent thousands of dollars a plate and flew out on your private plane to listen to him. That's the kind of of hard work that gets you liberty, everything else is an illusion created to make you feel better about your shitty job.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910814)

Executive has no power to do anything about any of this, so why bother with the dialogue?

Two things come to mind.

  1. Possibly some ideas for which the Executive does have power to control may be suggested.
  2. A vehicle to remind people that the Executive actually has no power over many (most?) things.

I mean, seriously, why do people think the President can perform "magic". Look at all the promises made by the Republican presidential candidates (simply for example), most cannot be fulfilled by the President, but must be done so by Congress.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (2)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910990)

Look at all the promises made by the Republican presidential candidates (simply for example), most cannot be fulfilled by the President, but must be done so by Congress.

It should, perhaps, be pointed out that almost all the promises made by the Democratic Presidential candidate in 2008 could not have been fulfilled by the President either.

Alas, the Republican Presidential candidate that year was at the top of my list of Republicans NEVER TO VOTE FOR EVER, NO MATTER WHAT. Plus, all his promises were things he couldn't do either.

So, I sat that campaign out. I expect to do the same again next year. Obama has shown some surprising twists, but he basically isn't someone I want in charge. And so far, none of the Republican candidates look like people I want in charge either....

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

chronoglass (1353185) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911210)

republican candidates, democratic candidates.. all the same, MADE IN TIAWAN!

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911226)

It should, perhaps, be pointed out that almost all the promises made by the Democratic Presidential candidate in 2008 could not have been fulfilled by the President either.

Yes, I know. As I said, I was simply using the current Republican candidates "(simply for example)".

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

AngryDeuce (2205124) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911038)

Hell, a few months back Michele Bachman promised $2 a gallon gas if she gets elected. [cnn.com]

By spring, I fully expect to hear promises of ice cream for all, no more taxes ever again, and world peace.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

Bucky24 (1943328) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911182)

I almost want to elect her just to see how she manages something like that.... I guess they could start up a company to collect oil from the gulf and refine it but that wouldn't last long.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (3, Informative)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910866)

While technically the Executive has no power, if the Obama administration really cared they would call up their pals in the House and say "We need a bill that does XYZ" or even "This is a bill we'd like to see pass. Introduce it please." It's technically correct to say bills originate in the House or Senate, but in practice the President can most definitely push a particular plan through Congress.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (3, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911140)

Though I'm not really that pleased with the administration right now, I do respect their intent here. I think that they're essentially just experimenting with ways to use the Internet to improve communication and create dialogue. That doesn't mean that every petition will result in action by the President to do exactly what the petition asks, but the dialogue itself is something.

I especially think it's worth cutting them some slack because we're still in the early days of these things. The general public hasn't really been using the Internet for 2 whole decades yet, and this is the first administration to make genuine efforts to make use of the Internet for these sorts of things. Some of the first attempts will be clumsy.

And when you look at their page describing what this site is about, this is the only thing they're offering: "If a petition gets enough support, White House staff will review it, ensure it’s sent to the appropriate policy experts, and issue an official response."

I mean, really, did you expect that the President is going to make a huge policy shift against major corporate interests because of a petition with 14k signatures?

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37910522)

What else would you expect from administration lawyers in a coming election year.

Anything less would be down right uncivilized, wouldn't it?

I disagree with him. (2)

khasim (1285) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910568)

I like candidate Obama a LOT more than President Obama. Oh well, at least he'll be campaigning for the year now.

It's called the "bully pulpit". The President drives the discussion by TALKING ABOUT IT. What the President says gets media coverage. Particularly if it's about jobs and the economy and innovation now.

By the way, didn't you guys introduce a jobs bill of some kind? So there is a means for you to get legislation started.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/American_Jobs_Act [wikimedia.org]

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (4, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910582)

Read the one about marijuana. Same sort of nicely worded fuck you, but with the added benefit of lies about effects and completely unsubstantiated claims!

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37910596)

Obviously you haven't heard the administration speak on any other subject.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37910610)

Politicians are often good at that...

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1, Troll)

StevenMaurer (115071) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910648)

Yours is the most impolitely worded show of ignorance and stupidity that I've read since I last perused WorldNutDaily.

It's election season. If Obama offered a bill that declared the United States to be the bestest most wonderful nation on the planet which has ever been ever, Republicans in Congress would filibuster it on the grounds that he is a Socielst Muslen Kenyan who hates America and our Troops.

And you think that his recommendation on solving the Patent issue would actually help?

The Administration is right. The only way forward on this is for the "public" (i.e. massive multi-billion dollar companies like Google, Microsoft, etc) to petition Congress, telling them that overly broad patents are bad for business (i.e. bad for GOP campaign contributions).

Everything else implied in your one line screed is bullshit.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (3, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910710)

Yes, Republicans control the House and will block anything he does.

So what was his excuse for his first two years in office?

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

TheEyes (1686556) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910992)

Forty Republicans in the Senate circling the wagons and preventing anything from being done (more fillabusters in two years than any other time in American history; the Obama administration can even get non-controversial middle managers confirmed.)

And? (1)

khasim (1285) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911218)

So because the mean people are being mean, he's not going to do ANYTHING?

At least get the legislation STARTED.
Then name and shame anyone who tries to stop it.
He's the President of the USofA. He gets worldwide coverage of his speeches.
Then repeat the process.

There would be change if he was on TV every other week saying Senator X blocked the "tax incentive for working Christian Moms with poor babies who need milk" bill.

Part of politics is being able to frame your opposition as the "bad" guys. Obama doesn't want to do that because he's always looking for a way to compromise with people who are willing to let this country DEFAULT rather than give an inch.

Re:And? (1)

TheEyes (1686556) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911332)

He's already doing this with that jobs bill. Nothing in there is controversial; at this point, the Republicans are voting against teachers and infrastructure projects. Doing the same with a software patent bill, something too technical for anyone but the Slashdot crowd to automatically know how important it is, would only dilute the message.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37911062)

No excuses, it was stupidity.
Instead of ramming through exactly what he wanted he tried to get consensus. He should have understood the GOP plan after a few weeks, instead it took him a couple of years to realize that the GOP only wanted to destroy him as opposed to trying to govern the country.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (2)

StuartHankins (1020819) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911124)

I think the Dems were shocked enough that they were in power, and got so excited, that they went in all different directions, willy-nilly. Sort of like if you give a bunch of people money they temporarily lose their minds.

What they needed to do was calm down enough to plan what needed to be done -- and sometimes you just have to make a decision even if it eventually turns out to be the wrong one. Too nuanced for the American public, people expected overnight change and became disillusioned. Unexpected catastrophes and turmoil stretched an already intellectually-busy president to the point he couldn't focus on one thing, solve it, and move to the next.

Although I've been disappointed in much that has happened, I think Obama has the right heart, it's just that he's panicked and scrambling for a foothold. It's painful to watch.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (2)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910838)

You really are drinking the Kool-Aide, Look *IF* it was the GOPs fault then Reid would have put the Jobs bill to the senate floor, let it fail in the House. The House has a wide GOP margin, the Senate has a narrow DNC margin. If this was about making the GOP look like obstructionists its a no brainier, let them filibuster in the senate in front of the news cameras or vote it down in the House. That way fault would fall clearly on their shoulders.

There are two reasonable conclusions you draw, one or both may be true:

1) There is little actual DNC support for the bill and they don't want look like there is in fighting between them and the President.

2) Obama recognizes his plan will be failure and the whole thing is just a smoke screen; Reid is complicit and thinks the GOP will be assigned the blame primary rather than congress in general.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (5, Informative)

TheEyes (1686556) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911122)

You really are drinking the Kool-Aide, Look *IF* it was the GOPs fault then Reid would have put the Jobs bill to the senate floor, let it fail in the House.

Check your facts. Reid did [npr.org] introduce the bill; it was filibustered. Sound familiar? Ever since 2008 the Republicans have been circling the wagons and killing anything that crosses their desk, even routine appointments to mid-level executive departments. That's why the public option was trashed, why meaningful banking reform was replaced by useless drivel, and why we can't have nice things like a AAA credit rating or disclosure of campaign donors (another bill killed by Republican opposition).

I'm not a huge fan of Obama, although I have to admit he has been right about much of his foreign policy decisions, but the Republicans in Congress/Senate these days deserve nothing but contempt. The first step in truly reforming Washington is to get rid of everyone with an (R) in front of his name (the second is to get rid of almost everyone with a (D) in front of their name).

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

bberens (965711) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911286)

I'm not saying it is, but it could be the most amazing piece of economic wizardry ever concocted by man-kind but the electorate is simply unwilling to put up with any more spending. Both sides of the aisle know this. I think Obama is genuine (at least as genuine as a politician can be) in suggesting that he believes his bill is helpful, but understands it's a non-starter. He has to run around saying they should do it though because otherwise he'll be "the guy with no plan."

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (3, Insightful)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910792)

If one needs further proof that "taxation without representation" is the law of the land you must be blind. We tell them to quit sending our kids to die in third world shitholes, they ignore us, tell them to stop throwing kids in jail for pot, they ignore us, tell them to do something about the border, to not give our money away to the top 1% with bailouts, to stop giving the 1% tax breaks, and bonuses for offshoring and H1-Bs...and they ignore us.

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson. What else can you call it when your vote no longer matters, the will of the people no longer matters, the corruption has become so bad they blatantly and without fear of repercussion ignore and disparage the will of the people for the TRUE government, by the corporate master and FOR the corporate masters? Tyranny, there is no other word for it.

OWS is only the beginning, as their insatiable greed destroys more and more of the country the people will get nastier and nastier and I doubt VERY seriously they'll quietly slink off to starve like they did during the great depression. When the other three bubbles they've blown, stocks, student loans, and retirement funds ALL blow, my guess is 2013 when that happens, its gonna get nasty folks. When even my late grandma who had voted every year since before WWII, refused to vote any longer because "The thing is so rigged its not like they are gonna listen to us anyway' then you know their little MSM bullshit and lies isn't working any more. Its gonna get nasty folks, maybe even our own Arab Spring.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

AngryDeuce (2205124) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911154)

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

- Thomas Jefferson

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.

- John F. Kennedy

You are absolutely right, Occupy Wall Street is only the beginning. Things are going to get much worse before they get any better.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

New Breeze (31019) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911302)

I almost wonder if they're counting on it, that's why they're stoking the fires dividing the haves and have nots. Rather than banding together and marching on Washington there will just be rioting where the local business owners houses are assaulted by the former recipients of the nanny state handouts when the system goes belly up.

I used to worry about my buddy the police officer and his stockpile of guns and ammo. He's positively convinced in the next few years we're going to see widespread rioting and looting. Lately I'm not so sure he's wrong.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

bluemonq (812827) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910880)

Replying to cancel accidental moderation.

Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (1)

jdbannon (1620995) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911034)

Really? This one [whitehouse.gov] seemed a little worse to me. It's pretty obvious at this point that he doesn't intend to meaningfully respond to any petition that isn't an automatic home run for him.

Hear That? (3, Insightful)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910418)

Anyone else hear a loud sucking noise?

Re:Hear That? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37910448)

There is no sound in a vacuum.

Re:Hear That? (1)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910466)

Atleast the government officials don't; all they hear is the gentle rustle of money spent by lobbiers.

Re:Hear That? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37910728)

yep, the politicians must be servicing their campaign donors again.

My Prediction (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37910454)

My prediction is that every "petition" will be responded to with "We hear you, but this is why its really okay as it is; you really don't want what you think you want"

Re:My Prediction (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910512)

I think you're psychic, sir.

Re:My Prediction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37910518)

What they should respond with, "We're glad you dropped by our site. We went to great lengths to convince you that we can doing things for you even though we are just one third of the Givernment. We can't do what you ask now, but no worries. Now that we have you useful idiots on our side we can probably figure a way to circumvent that pesky Constitution and rule be decree."

Re:My Prediction (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910726)

Quite right, It also means we need to make a new petition.

Why are you even holding this if you are going to respond in such a dismissive manner to every suggestion? What is the purpose of wasting everyones time when you knew from the beginning that you would do this? Instead of dismissing this petition just as flippantly, we urge you to go back and act on the other petitions.

Re:My Prediction (5, Informative)

Cowclops (630818) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910776)

Re:My Prediction (1)

imric (6240) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910972)

Signed.

Re:My Prediction (1)

jdbannon (1620995) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911076)

Also signed.

into the wind (1)

zman58 (1753390) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911100)

Oh yea. I did just sign that petition. Spitting into the wind... Thanks.

Re:My Prediction (1)

Bucky24 (1943328) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911234)

I can't wait to see what their response to this one is.

Re:My Prediction (1)

omnichad (1198475) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911294)

Can't wait to hear the response to this (signed).

Re:My Prediction (1)

Anon-Admin (443764) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910780)

I would sign that petition!

Re:My Prediction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37910826)

I saw at least 3 of those yesterday looking thru the list...

Re:My Prediction (1)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910746)

They're just holding a mirror up to the voting public and pretending that makes it a conversation.

Re:My Prediction (2)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910864)

You didn't think they actually care about the content of the submissions, do you? They're just trying to make the electorate feel listened to, so that they'll give Obama a second chance.

Now if a big corporation asked for the elimination of software patents, that's a different story.

Re:My Prediction (3, Informative)

Steauengeglase (512315) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910968)

Sounds like the response to every letter I've ever sent to a Congressman.

That's correct. Congress sets patentability policy (2)

Animats (122034) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910472)

That's up to Congress, not the Executive Branch.

Re:That's correct. Congress sets patentability pol (2)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910930)

That's up to Congress, not the Executive Branch.

I partially disagree. The White House has plenty of influence on the legislative process due to deal-making.

He'll be our President because we put him there (4, Insightful)

Hairy1 (180056) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910532)

"He'll be our President because we put him there"... I think maybe Democracy is broken. If regardless of who you vote for the result is the same you are living in a Dictatorship. It's not just patents either - Gitmo, Iraq, Patriot Act, Health Care, seems that even when the Republicans aren't in office they are. No wonder the focus has been on security - they are gonna need it when the people find out they have been duped by the DemoRepublican Party for so long.

Re:He'll be our President because we put him there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37910566)

At least we're getting kicked out of Iraq...

Maybe we can get Iraq to kick out software patents here?

Re:He'll be our President because we put him there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37910782)

You know your reasoning has been warped when your personal dissatisfaction with candidates means that the existing (democratic) political order must be overthrown in favor of leadership which is guaranteed to reflect your personal priorities.

Now THAT is Dictatorship

Re:He'll be our President because we put him there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37910902)

You don't have to vote for a republican or democrat. They get to be presidents because everyone votes for them.

Re:He'll be our President because we put him there (1)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911036)

If regardless of who you vote for the result is the same you are living in a Dictatorship.

Agreed, so what do you call it when the citizens keep voting for the same two parties?

Re:He'll be our President because we put him there (1)

pburghdoom (1892490) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911266)

You would need a third party candidate that is charismatic enough and strong enough politically to garner the votes. Currently that is practically impossible. Most people have been conditioned if they vote for a third party candidate that it is really just "stealing" votes from other viable candidates (Nader/Gore Perot/Bush). Also I fear that the very political process would just corrupt anyone with the credentials to get that far.

Re:He'll be our President because we put him there (1)

Forty Two Tenfold (1134125) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911326)

Agreed, so what do you call it when the citizens keep voting for the same two parties?

Stupidity.

Re:He'll be our President because we put him there (1)

Forty Two Tenfold (1134125) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911360)

Agreed, so what do you call it when the citizens keep voting for the same two parties?

Stupidity.

Actually, no:

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. — Albert Einstein

Re:He'll be our President because we put him there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37911202)

The problem is your perception that this is a Republican problem. I know you make it sound like you understand that both parties are to blame at the end but earlier in your post you use the classic ploy of misdirection so that we, the people, make the assumption that it's not a problem with the Democrats but only a problem with a handful of bad Democrats. If you keep thinking and voting this way you're only going to end up further down on the food chain at the end of the day.
 
Either you vote against both parties or you're voting for both parties. The disguise of two seperate parties is so thin now you can blow smoke rings through it.

Expect more of this (5, Insightful)

loteck (533317) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910550)

This whole move to respond to people's questions from the Executive Branch is very clearly a tactic to redirect voter ire to the Legislative Branch, where laws are made and passed. I would expect most of the replies to include some portion urging voters to contact their legislators. Recent administrations have left the American public under the impression that the executive branch can act unilaterally as long as you have Darth Vader as a vice president.

That's not the way this country is supposed to run. Things like this with the Executive communicating with voters directly are great, don't stop that, but call your goddamned lawmaker, too.

Translation (2)

poofmeisterp (650750) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910586)

"Hey man, we're just doin' our job. Now get off our lawn."

Smoke + Ass (1)

lbmouse (473316) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910636)

So they are just blowing smoke up our asses AGAIN.

So naive... (2)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910644)

Software patents are a government program for creating "fairness" among software developers and companies. Government creating "fairness" is one of those things right up there with sex offender laws that no "right-thinking person" in politics dares to question.

Obama was never going to support something which would be called a scheme to let big interests loot "the little guy." That's how most people see this stuff. They don't get caught up in facts like a little company getting nuked out of the water by a big one using blatantly bad patents. Fair is fair and it's not fair that someone gets rich by taking someone else's ideas and succeeding with them.

Missing The Point (5, Insightful)

Bob9113 (14996) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910654)

'concerns that overly broad patents on software-based inventions may stifle the very innovative and creative open source software development community.'

Let me translate: I know you dirty hippies believe in utopia, and you've done some interesting things, but you are not being realistic. The real producers are Microsoft and Amazon.

Here's the thing though, knucklehead: Microsoft, Amazon, Oracle, Apple, IBM, and eBay -- not one of those companies could make it out of the garage today. It's not just the dirty hippies you are harming, it is entrepreneurs -- the guys building a better mousetrap -- the icons that "America Invents" is pretending to recognize. It is the kinds of people who turned America into a superpower in the 50's and 60's. The engines of tomorrow's economic superiority. That is who patents are harming -- and their blood is running over the alter of a few extra private jets today, for an ever smaller sliver of people who did something great twenty years ago, and have been kicking everyone else off the hill ever since.

Re:Missing The Point (3, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910790)

Here's the thing though, knucklehead: Microsoft, Amazon, Oracle, Apple, IBM, and eBay -- not one of those companies could make it out of the garage today. It's not just the dirty hippies you are harming, it is entrepreneurs -- the guys building a better mousetrap -- the icons that "America Invents" is pretending to recognize.

You don't really think that big business campaign donors want entrepeneurs setting up competitors in their garage, do you?

Re:Missing The Point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37911090)

"Here's the thing though, knucklehead: Microsoft, Amazon, Oracle, Apple, IBM, and eBay -- not one of those companies could make it out of the garage today."

And the fun thing is, those people WERE the "dirty hippies" back when they were in their garage. (Take a look at the staff pictures for microsoft from years years ago compared to the same people there current day.)

They know full well what would happen if they continued to let more hippies get out of the garage, which is why they've done what they've done to prevent it.

Re:Missing The Point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37911164)

yeh seems like every startup is just a lawsuit waiting to happen, the very second they start making money or eating into someone biggers business, they'll be struck down and sucked dry by a bunch of laywers

The We the People Site (3, Insightful)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910684)

This is great, thanks Mr.President for this amazing simplification of the political process. In the past I would have had figure out who my Senator is and write to his office to get a condescending BS laden response, on why its so important we preserve the status quo.

Now all I have to do is post on one easy to remember website and if enough people also want to hear why a certain campaign donator needs to have their economic rent protected the White House will kindly oblige.

Federal Research (1)

bigsexyjoe (581721) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910734)

Corporations benefit greatly from the twin forms of Corporate welfare that are patents and government research.

I believe all knowledge gained from government research should go into something similar to an open source license. So that all technology based on government research should be free, open, and unpatentable.

How can you patent counting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37910738)

If it is true that all computer programs can be represented as a string of 0s and 1s, it means all computer programs can be counted to. Now, if all computer programs can be counted to, then computer programs are discoveries and not inventions. If computer programs are not inventions, then computer programs are not patentable.

Re:How can you patent counting? (1)

omnichad (1198475) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911344)

Oh, sure. And books are just really big base-127 numbers represented by letters, numbers, and spaces. It's just a number, you can't copyright a number. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

And you expected what...? (0)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910760)

...However, the overall response redirects action to the petitioners through participating in the open implementation site and contacting Congress, instead of a promise to prepare additional legislative measures for Congress to consider on behalf of the petitioners.

And you expected what else from this administration? I mean, really?

Re:And you expected what...? (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910794)

I believe you mean from any administration.

Politicians are all cut from the same cloth.

Actually Take These Petitions Seriously Petittion (5, Informative)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910770)

The responses to these petitions have been so uniformly transparent constituent fluffing through sophistry that there's already a meta-petition:

Actually Take These Petitions Seriously Instead of Just Using Them As An Excuse to Pretend You Are Listening Petition [whitehouse.gov] .

Once this one gets answered, the web content filters will be remiss in not filtering the site as entertainment, or masturbatory porn.

Cease and Desist (1)

Sentrion (964745) | more than 2 years ago | (#37910802)

November 1, 2011

Mr. Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. Obama:

If you are represented by legal counsel, please direct this letter to your attorney immediately and have your attorney notify us of such representation.

We are writing to notify you that your unlawful use of a process to respond to software patent petitions infringes upon our client’s exclusive patent(s). Accordingly, you are hereby directed to

CEASE AND DESIST ALL PATENT INFRINGEMENT.

I'm more concerned with biotech patents (1)

thepainguy (1436453) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911008)

While I don't have a problem with people patenting an organism or process they have created, I have a massive problem with people being able to patent a gene or other aspect of the body that they merely discovered.

seems impossible to fix this ... (1)

swframe (646356) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911216)

The our government is broken but no solution can garner enough support to make a difference.

It's about the companies (4, Insightful)

Jim Hall (2985) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911236)

I think part of the problem is that companies don't entirely want software patents to go away.

When I first started speaking with my Senator's office (Franken - D-MN) about software patents, I gave examples how software patents are a hindrance to American companies, how patent troll lawsuits use the US court system as their revenue stream.

The Senator's office said that they had met with several large US companies (Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc) and while the companies agree that software patents are a problem that need to be curbed, they also need them to "protect their business." I'm told Bill Gates said he's never worried about the next Google, he's worried about some kid in his garage creating the "next Big Thing". So these companies use software patents to sue or threaten the little start-ups before they can become a competitor.

I pointed out that Gates started as a kid in his basement, and Apple started as a couple of guys in a garage, and Amazon started as Bezos doing mail-order from his garage. All these big tech companies started that way. And if we block the next Amazon or the next Microsoft from happening, that's not going to help the US economy. The Senator's office had to agree it was a fair point.

I think if you reduced the term for software patents, you might have a workable solution. Certainly it would be better than what we have now, and I'm prepared to accept that as a next-step. In most cases today, anyway, it may take a few years for something to pop up on the radar, and a patent troll to realize that it's using something from their portfolio.

So... they punted (1)

Wokan (14062) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911280)

Translation: We can't be bothered by this issue that never hits the mass media news cycles.

Do we owe him any money? (1)

flanders_down (2424442) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911288)

I mean, he's been jacking us off for a few years now. He should be compensated.

All the cynics are right... (1)

fooslacker (961470) | more than 2 years ago | (#37911362)

This is a ridiculous response that basically says "we're not interested given that our donors like patents". That said the way you respond to a ridiculous response is by continuing to hound them until it becomes a major issue. Here is one I created to end all patents as I believe the system itself is corrupt and needs to be replaced by open competition.

http://wh.gov/bjZ [wh.gov]

I encourage everyone to sign it or create your own and post them here. Slashdot has shown the ability to nuke major sites due to the size of it's audience/community...let's make it clear we feel strongly about the issue. At the very least maybe they will take down their fake petition site which is offensive due to the fact they don't pay any attention to it. =)
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?