From phm@xxx.xxx Fri Dec 3 14:51:54 1999 X-Digest-Num: 301 Message-ID: <44114.301.1647.959273825@eGroups.com> Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 23:51:54 +0100 (CET) From: PILCH Hartmut >- write up additional documents to argue the case for using a Logical > > Language in patent specifications > > I can't imagine being able to write something on this better than you can. My ability is limited by my knowledge of Lojban. I am not yet able to translate any single set of patent claims into Lojban, although each time I translate Japanese patent claims into English, I very much deplore the ambiguity of the original and the extra ambiguity introduced by the translation. In general, Japanese is capable of holding more complex syntactic structures than English. Many Japanese patents actually lose in European courts because of some misunderstanding which crept in during the translation. Patent descriptions are often chillingly amusing. There is a certain thrill in reading, how Amazon got a monopoly on buying books with a single mouse click etc, and how this kind of thing is formulated in very complicated and ambiguous sentences. One could make a lot of fun of such an example without even criticising it directly. One could then explain the limitations of non-logical language and show how Lojban does better. This could be deepened by a Japanese example. > > > Signing a petition on patents > > > sounded like meaningless support when none of us actually do any work with > > > patents; > > > >That's like saying "Signing a petition on civil liberties is meaningless > >when none of us is actually a lawyer". > > I think most Americans think that signing a petition on anything is > meaningless. We are taught more or less that policy is affected either by > ballot or by campaign contribution. Some people of course think that > political demonstrations have an effect too (e.g. Seattle), but that hasn't > been too popular an option in 30 years. The petitions of FFII (10000 people against expansion of the European patent system into the realm of software) have raised a lot of press attention and have had an impact on public opinion. Before, the EU officials claimed that they had "consulted the interested parties". Now everybody knows that they have acted only behind closed doors and that the interested parties are against them. We are continuing to build public pressure on this. The next step is to get us into the legislative commission. Major German software companies and news media are supporting this campaign. > (Further discussion on this topic (how to influence policies) in Lojban > might attract those who have been discussing the Seattle events) If the Lojban community can send out the signal that (1) we intend Lojban to solve the problems of patent language (2) we can show that Lojban keeps what it promises then others will take up the issue and do the lobbying work. The current petition was signed by some people from the Association for the Maintenance of the German Language (VWDS), which campaigns against the abolition of German in the patent system and has 7000 members, some of them quite active, with large media coverage and known by everybody. These people only want to know that Lojban actually can do what I claim it can do. It must be shown that the idea itself is rock solid and not just a fancy of a few crackpots. > >Patents are binding law that everybody is concerned with. > > Understood that they affect everyone, but most people are not "concerned" > (meaning they consider it something in the background that is to be put up > with, however the powers-that-be arrange them. This makes the campaigning especially hard, but not hopeless. Compared to the relatively small effort we have so far put into it, the resonance has been splendid. Even if this campaign doesn't achieve its goals, it can easily succeed in making Lojban known to a lot of people. To many more than you could reach by any high-cost advertisement campaign. > >So I would say, on the contrary, a couple of citiziens count more than 100 > >IP lawyers. > > Only if anyone reads the petition. People might pay attention to someone > they know who is making a campaign contribution, over 100 people who they > never heard of who aren't. If the idea is widely supported, even a few lawyers will figure out that this gives them a market to make some money, and suddenly they will discover the call of their conscience. > Sorry if I sound cynical. You can hardly beat me in cynicism. Only by adding cynicism to idealism can we become realists. > Maybe I'm just tired. I really would like your > efforts to get somewhere, but too often it sounds so > hopeless. Esperantists and Interlinguists have been lobbying the EU for > years and have gotten nowhere. Lojbanists have in their hands something that can be put to technical use. That's quite different. -- phm