Lincoln the Patentee.

Recently I was involved in debate over the current patent system. The discussion can be seen here: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/microsoft-surface-patent-10000-us,7004.html#comments One of my opponents laugh on me that I used argument that I had not chance to confirm independently. I have heard many times that US constitution is promoting the current patent and copyright system. Here is latest example: Next came the Patent laws. These began in England in 1624; and, in this country, with the adoption of our constitution. Before then [these?], any man might instantly use what another had invented; so that the inventor had no special advantage from his own invention. The patent system changed this; secured to the inventor, for a limited time, the exclusive use of his invention; and thereby added the fuel of interest to the fire of genius, in the discovery and production of new and useful things. ~ Abraham Lincoln. My quick read of the constitution could not support this argument. Can someone help me find the true. Is the current patent system was promoted by the US constitution?

See a couple of blog items I wrote on the matter (primarily concerning copyright, but also applicable to patent): Constitutional Sanction and Mythologising Copyright.

Just another reason why Abraham Lincoln is ranked as the number one U.S. president.

When discussing/arguing/debating patent and copyright law one needs to realize that the patent law of today is NOT the same as it was in 1790. Statements such as "US constitution is promoting the current patent and copyright system" (emphasis added) are incomplete and misleading. The court system and legislative actions over the past several decades have aggrandized the concepts of copyright and patents in favor of the content creator and to the detriment of society.

It seems we have a whole new breed of "patent troll" in the world -- a forum/usenet troll whose axe-to-grind is patents. :)

Of course, Abraham Lincoln is considered "great" for having freed slaves by winning the Civil War, not for anything to do with patents (or his bowel movements, or anything else nasty like that, for that matter).

Beeswax:

I would rather be a troll than a stalker like you.

Lincoln is considered great also for keeping the Union together, even though he killed 500,000 people to do it, even though it was unconstitutional, immoral, illegal, and a mistake.

Our resident troll wrote:

"I would rather be a troll than [false accusation and insult deleted]"

None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at all true.

Beeswax:

Really, none of the things that I have said about you are true, though they are fact? I offer the words you provided at Techdirt:

You advocate that others acquire your stalking habit, by saying "...perhaps a bunch of us can pick different blogs and/or days of the week to find...Lonnie."

So, not only are you a stalker, but you deny the truths that you have stated, that convict you for what you are. I will no longer respond to your mean, paranoid, perjurous comments. You are a truly frightening, sick individual who needs professional help.

Our resident troll wrote:

"Really, none of the things that I have said about you are true, though they are fact?"

But they are not fact.

"You advocate that others acquire your stalking habit, by saying "...perhaps a bunch of us can pick different blogs and/or days of the week to find...Lonnie.""

No, I advocate that others volunteer to publicly correct your numerous egregious errors and prevent the general populace from being misled. There is a difference.

"So, not only are you [insult deleted], but [calls me a liar], that convict you for what you are. I will no longer respond to your [insult deleted], [insult deleted], [calls me a liar] comments. You are a truly [insult deleted], [insult deleted] individual who [vicious insult deleted]."

No, you're the liar and the crazy one.

None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at all true.

Beeswax:

Sadly, they are true. I have asked a local law enforcement person regarding your posts, and he agreed that you are a very disturbed person. He said that if you live close to me, I have plenty of grounds for a restraining order.

I am quite happy that you live where you do, and I live where I do, far, far away from you.

Our resident troll wrote:

"[vicious insults and nonsense deleted]"

All lies.

None of the nasty things that you have said or implied about me are at all true.

The only one who needs restraining around here is you, from posting to this blog any more.

Of course, now None of Your Beeswax is advocating yet another restriction of personal freedom. It appears to me that Beeswax is in favor of a fascist dictatorship, possibly with him in charge.

Ah. I see our resident troll is also a stalker. That he responded with another stupid flame full of lies in less than an hour proves it -- the expectation value of the time before a reply is half the interval between successive checks for new posts, so we can conclude that Lonnie is checking for new posts at least twice an hour -- twelve times a day -- 84 times a week -- over 4000 times a year -- you get the picture.

The only reason I suggested Lonnie be restricted from posting here, of course, is that the sole purpose of his posts is to be inflammatory and to mislead. He long since dropped the pretense of seeking enlightenment, and 90% of his output now is personal attacks directed mainly at me.

Meanwhile, of course, none of the nasty things that Lonnie has said or implied about me are at all true.