Subject: [TS] Re: ramblings
From: Jack Park (jackpark@verticalnet.com)
Date: Thu Mar 16 2000 - 18:37:12 EST
Hi Andrius,
Each time I have some kind of discussion with you, I gain a deeper insight
into the kindness, generosity, and genuine intelligence that comprise your
being. I believe your response to my question reflects genuine interest in
the subject. You respond to my question with an equally good one: "who
defines ownership". Living here in America, I walk on horribly thin ice
taking that one on in the big picture. Indeed, it can easily be pointed out
that Europeans came here and took possession of resources from native
cultures -- cultures that may not have embraced the concept of ownership at
all -- and set up the country in which I now live. Thin ice, indeed.
But then, it makes sense to focus the nature of your version of the question
on the specifics at hand: who can own ideas? Specifically, in this case,
can anyone own ideas which others are already practicing in one way or
another? I suspect not.
So, now we return to the bottom line in this issue, and that is simple
greed. Something we all possess, some to a greater degree than others. It
is completely reasonable to expect young Harlan Hugh to gain some protection
on what I would easily judge to be a fine execution of some ideas. I would
likely have similar, if not the same thoughts. But then, external entities,
those who are corresponding with you on this topic, take issue with the
claims young Harlan makes in his patent. I once built an expert system for
a client that solved an enormous problem. Payback on the project was over
1000 to one immediately. They got a patent on the project, over my
objections. I later built a completely different -- outside the patent --
program that could do the same thing.
And now, you have been asked to express your concerns to TheBrain and you
respond that this would end in the cessation of your activities. A
reasonable, perhaps defensive response, that. Greed, in all of us, is at
work here. I don't want a thought-to-be invalid patent holding me back from
the work I am doing, which happens to be greatly similar to some of the
patent claims, and which I have been doing since 1983. Thusly, I do bring
my own variant of greed to the table as well. I also don't want to have to
spend the money required to defend my positions.
In fact, Andrius, your own activity about thinking should be entirely, for
the time being, directed toward solving the puzzle (maybe, playing the game)
created by this patent. I, for one, think the patent to be a great
defensive move on Harlan's part since it does prevent me from ever putting
him in a corner. But then, he has succeeded in putting me in the corner;
it's true, I was just watching the pawns. Naturally, I will join any debate
in favor of Harlan's releasing his expensive patent to the public domain.
In fact, I would support a fund that bought it from him. If that came to
pass, young Harlan Hugh will have done a great service to humanity. If it
does not, and if he chooses to challenge any of his claims, my hunch is that
there will be blood shed (read: dollars spent) on all sides. Ultimately, we
will all have to be ready to defend against any kind of patent that clearly
steps on the toes of those who have already been doing what was claimed.
My hunch is that some idea of where we are going is discussed on this site:
http://www.andovernews.com/cgi-bin/news_column.pl?533
in which it is stated:
"Dickinson and his management team now compensate employees based on the
number of applications they process. The result has been an avalanche of
patent approvals. Last year patent approvals mushroomed to over 169,154. "
Dickinson is the chief in the patent office, and employees referenced are
patent examiners.
That, I suspect, is just the tip of the ol' iceberg.
You said
> If somebody is intimidated by TheBrain, I'm very willing to help. Step
> up!
Can that be read to mean you will join in any defense activity against this
patent?
Do unto others... has always influenced my behavior. It should do so for
everyone.
On your comment:
> You can't kill something that's not alive. There has never been a
> mainstream tool for organizing thoughts, and there may never be.
I would have to register a hearty disagreement. There are now, and there
are evolving tools that serve this purpose and serve it well. TheBrain is
just one instance. Inspiration, Visio, and others exist in public, and still
others exist in private labs, many funded by governments all over the world.
And more will come into existence. Of course, "main stream" applies only to
those available to the public, and they are few, but they do exist.
You said:
> It wouldn't hurt if you became a member.
> Even if you were a member, it's my job to make sure we stay on track.
> So for us to organize action as a group, it has to:
> a) relate to caring about thinking
> b) get things done towards that
"Stay on track..." Who defines the track? You? Some of the discussion here
looks like a perfectly reasonable track for those who are discussing things
profoundly related to thinking. Say what?
Cheers
Jack
> Hi Jack!
> Good to "hear your voice".
>
> "First question: who defines "best usage"?... If not, may I suggest that
> you
> take some time to recall the history of the Soviet Union. Personally, I
> would hate to think that the money I earn and spend on a home for my
> family
> would turn out to be "better used" by, say, some homeless family. Not
> that
> I lack compassion, but, in my judgement, that wouldn't be the "best use"
> of
> resources I personally marshal."
>
> I completely agree that you've nailed the big question. But who defines
> "ownership"? I'm willing to start by saying that - morally - you
> yourself define "best usage". Do unto others as you would have others
> do unto you. I think that helps clarify morality and accountability.
> Whatever we hate to think, it forces us to think. I wouldn't doubt your
> better at spending money than many homeless families, it all depends. I
> like the point of view because it doesn't change much, but it doesn't
> let us take anything for granted, let us cling to anything.
>
> Hi, Michael!
>
> "The upshot is that TheBrain LLC's patent could kill off or alter the
> course of a vital and developing area of software development by small
> scale inventors and experimentors. This must be exactly what the patent
> filers wished for. What a pitiful and destructive mentality. This is why
> I've tried to bring attention to the issue; I think it could be a
> "silent killer"."
>
> You can't kill something that's not alive. There has never been a
> mainstream tool for organizing thoughts, and there may never be. It all
> depends on how our civilization goes. TheBrain is making a tremendous
> effort. They have put in a concentrated five year effort - glacial in
> Internet time - to get where they are. They have risked tremendous
> amounts of money, I imagine much more than what they have gained from
> licenses. They have been progressive in very many ways - both in terms
> of how they foresee the importance of their product, and the
> relationships they build with users, given their very limited resources,
> their need to focus.
>
> "Even if it costs the lab the support of TheBrain LLC. For whatever
> they've
> contributed,"
>
> You're asking our laboratory to shut down - and for me to give up what
> I've been working on, and spend a couple of years at a job I don't want
> to pay about $35,000 in loans - for a principle that you haven't made
> clear to me. And not get to live in Lithuania and find a sweetheart
> there and raise a family.
>
> "I am quite dissapointed if Minciu Sodas as a group will not register a
> strong complaint with TheBrain LLC."
>
> It wouldn't hurt if you became a member.
> Even if you were a member, it's my job to make sure we stay on track.
> So for us to organize action as a group, it has to:
> a) relate to caring about thinking
> b) get things done towards that
>
> "TheBrain LLC now represents a threat to free thinking and expression in
> this important area."
>
> In chess, there is an expression - the threat is mightier than the
> execution. People get so discombobulated over a threat on a pawn that
> they lose touch with the bigger picture.
>
> "Before, I had every reason to wish for the continued success of
> Natrificial;
> now I have every reason to hope for it's failure."
>
> Minciu Sodas laboratory works for everbody's material success in our
> endeavor to create an import/export standard, regardless of how we feel
> about them. There is a very real possibility that Microsoft might
> become a member. Certainly the Central Intelligence Agency spends a lot
> of money on knowledge representation. The Department of Defense has a
> lot of money available, too.
>
> I don't have a complete set of rules, and I'm glad you're bringing up
> this case because it helps to put them together. We're not going to
> turn people away just because we don't like them. We probably will
> pursue people we do like. But mostly we're going to have the people who
> find us a good forum for work. The strength of our laboratory is that
> we attract really great people. Maybe it helps that we have a
> threshhold for participation. Maybe it helps that we work hard and have
> bold dreams and actually are achieving them.
>
> It also helps that we have people play by our rules. I have a lot of
> companies say "public domain - why would we sponsor something in the
> public domain?" So you can believe that I value those who do. If
> Microsoft wants to support something in the public domain, I am open to
> that. If they want to sponsor an investigation that pins them down as
> to what they believe, and has us challenge it, I am open to that.
>
> I don't think I'd want to judge people or companies based on what is
> outside of my work with them. Maybe that will affect how much effort I
> put in to approach them. I am not chasing after money from the Central
> Intelligence Agency. If they want to work with me, fine, I will show
> them how we have to work. I have experience negotiating with the KGB
> and I never had problems because I never listened to threats and I never
> compromised. Of course, they kicked me out of the country and
> blacklisted me, but things worked out.
>
> Michael, who do you work for? How do you deal with issues of right and
> wrong? It would help if you gave some examples.
>
> "The only two kinds of barriers that I can imagine they were hoping
> would be
> created would be (1) fear engendered by the threat of a patent
> infringement
> lawsuit, or (2) an actual patent infringement lawsuit. This is poisoning
> the
> well, the well of thought organization."
>
> I will share my thoughts, which come from a different angle. I think
> its normal to believe that Microsoft, the most obvious case, would
> destroy a competitor, perhaps unintentionally. NetManage ECCO, to my
> understanding, was done in by the inferior Microsoft Outlook being given
> away for free with Microsoft Office. In our imperfect world, it seems
> understandable that a company making tremendous investments would want
> the protection of patents.
>
> "(The patents) issuance creates a significant barrier to entry for
> companies
> considering developing similar technology and solidifies TheBrain.com's
> position as the leading provider of visual information environments."
>
> To my understanding, this is part of a press release. Who was it
> intended for? Presumably venture capitalists. Note also that they
> stress "visual information environments". That's a different direction
> than organizing thoughts. All this shows, to me, is how difficult it is
> to work in our world where things have to be bent to make them
> attractive to venture capitalists who might not know the true worth. My
> personal goal with regard to TheBrain - and with every member - is to
> help them value and enjoy what caring about thinking is all about. I'm
> trying to focus my energies so that TheBrain succeeds as a tool for
> organizing thoughts. The import/export standard is vital for this.
>
> With regards to the reach of the patent, I think it helps to know that
> TheBrain is the invention of a really young man, Harlan Hugh, perhaps in
> many ways similar to Ben Darnell. Harlan was very bold - and inventive
> - in developing TheBrain, and his boldness is very fresh. Of course, we
> want to support that. This young man is asked to honestly write down
> what he accomplished so that they wouldn't become one more victim of the
> impressively powerful Microsoft. He did this, perhaps enthusiastically,
> in the spirit of a true discoverer. Certainly, TheBrain is grandiose.
> Lo and behold, the patent office issued the patent. I don't know the
> facts of patent law or even this case. My job is to make sure we have a
> good attitude. All we know is that TheBrain has some trump cards. What
> they are going to do with them, I don't know, nor what they're really
> worth. So long as we're all working productively, I'm fine with it.
>
> I think a more serious analogy would be the United States with 10,000
> nuclear weapons. That's quite a trump card. There's a lot of good
> reasons to disarm those weapons. There's some prudence in not disarming
> them. We're certainly happy Lithuania or most any other country doesn't
> have them. I think that countries which view the nuclear weapons of the
> United States as a threat aren't going to get very far. They'll make a
> lot more progress focusing on positive directions, some of which the
> United States is overlooking. The real question is, what are we going
> to focus on in life. I think if the people in this world focus on the
> real needs, then the weapons will become more and more irrelevant.
> That's why our laboratory's mission is to connect people from all over
> the world, get them into the loop. That's why I'm crossing the border
> to Tijuana, Mexico to find people who care about thinking.
>
> If somebody is intimidated by TheBrain, I'm very willing to help. Step
> up!
>
> Andrius
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special Offer-Earn 300 Points from MyPoints.com for trying @Backup
Get automatic protection and access to your important computer files.
Install today:
http://click.egroups.com/1/2344/3/_/6321/_/953249660/
eGroups.com Home: http://www.egroups.com/group/thoughtstream/
http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Wed Aug 30 2000 - 22:01:01 EDT