IPcentral Weblog: FSF as an Activist Organization

Sight of the problem from Europe:
Companies has its lobbyist - they do much more aggressive politics than any activist organization.
An example problems.
The most of software patents have very low quality - they patents often solutions known from years before. Only to swindle money from IT industry (patent trolls). Patent offices are not able to verify their novelty, they even do not have motivation to do that well. Because each wrongly assigned patent is a harm for society (just by put stealing public property and knowledge that lies in public domain usually developed using money taken from our taxes) they should be responsible or even fined for each invalid patent that they issues.
So I can understood the point if the patent offices are not able to award patents correctly on software solutions they should not give them at all. Patents are feudal tool from feudal culture. Sometimes useful (when they rewards inventions, breakthroughs) sometimes harmful (when they protecting simple innovations, modifications, compositions). If the balance in applying of such protection is destroyed it would appear feudal market, loss of productivity and no competition. In the perspective loss of growth.
I think that only a few economists wants the situation that the better choice for a young men will be to study law and become patent-lawyer than study IT and become developer. Law itself is not a product that can be packaged, exported and gives productivity advancement and growth. I think that everybody is against creating artificial markets using law. The artificial system gives always a powerful control on market in fact for a few at the cost of society rights and overall development (see communism - everything regulated).
If the software may be implemented faster, better and cheaper using foss approach why to give privileges for the corps - just to protect holy cows? Why to protect corporations invests in IT technologies that can be developed in foss joint venture approach for a fraction of the development cost (just cheaper). Maybe they should be encouraged to invest capital in more advanced and really novel technologies: robotics, biotechnology, nanotechnology? Current situation is like drilling drying spring. The free market should decide what is better and more efficient - not law and lobbyists. There are places where foss is more efficient (packaged software market where produced tools can be easy replicate and used by all in unmodified way) and less efficient (IT service implementation market where customized and optimized solution is delivered directly to client). The first market fells uncomfortable with foss cheaper competitor however the second welcomes foss as a source of cheap technology used as "bricks". And it is reasonable to have basic building block technology as cheap as possible (as cheap as its production in really cost) to promote economy progress and development. And in this way I suppose that now foss gives work to much more people than any proprietary company. Cheap software fuels other technologies ecosystems giving growth to all industries (financial, biotechnology, automobile industry, mobiles etc). So, what advantage from economy point of view is in removing such growth factor from economy and harass and mess in all industries with software patents (because this problem is open not only limited to IT technology developers but also IT users)? What advantage is in setting such tax on economy (usually not justified because supported by many invalid patents usually hard to invalidate because of invalidation procedure costs)? Now, it is just like patenting of an alphabet and charge economy for basic reading and writing. Why to do that? Is it efficient? What is a profit for me in having less, worse and more expensive products to buy delivered by oligopoly built on cross-licensing and legal mess and risk in using them? The economy to be efficient must be market driven not law driven. Parsimonious losses twice.
Patents are different from copyright. Copyright protects my own effort. Makes my effort my property. And in this way it is moral, democratic, pro-market, justified mean. The patents however interfere with the freedom of others. Took other rights to do their own work and fund they enterprises and development. This schema of patent working is immoral (tooks other humans and companies their natural rights to develop themself), undemocratic and anti-market (feudal). Explainable by high cost of devising of invention.

The "patent product" as you force it is in fact a monetarization of freedom taken back by force from economy by law means. It is market developing tool?

Finally, how may software have you written in your life? I suppose none. Do you think that you may be in position of dentist talking about archeology? I thing that the pro-stagnant (and corporate) thinking on the aspect of will collapse in the perspective 10-20 years. The problem is only how much harm it brings to the economy during this time.
Which religion is better yours or Stalman's? Your probably in the perspective of a few years. Stalman's when China start mass production of software patents as they do previously with clothes and consumer electronics ;) .