White House Responds To Software Patents Petition 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."
Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (Score:1, Informative)
Actually Take These Petitions Seriously Petittion (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:My Prediction (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (Score:4, Informative)
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:My Prediction (Score:4, Informative)
Sounds like the response to every letter I've ever sent to a Congressman.
Re:I've got to hand it to the administration (Score:4, Informative)
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 (Score:5, Informative)
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 (Score:2, Informative)
If you read John Mauldin's book, Endgame, about our current situation, he explains the bind the government is in. If you look at part 1 [minyanville.com] and 2 [minyanville.com] of his chapter on basic economics, you might get an understanding of how there is nothing the government CAN do, at least not actively. Obama wants you to believe he can fix these problems, but he can.
From the first page of part 2:
--------------------
Now let's go back to our first equation. You remember,
GDP = C + I + G + Net Exports
We'll spare you the mathematical rigmarole, but if you play with this equation some, you come up with the following:
Savings = Investments
That is, the savings of consumers and businesses are what's available for investment in businesses, which grow the economy. But there's a rather large but.
Those savings are also what finances government debt. Unless a central bank elects to print money, government debt must be financed by the private sector. That means if the fiscal deficit is too large, it will crowd out private investment. But as we've seen, private investment is what fuels productivity growth, so if you don't have enough savings to satisfy private investment needs, you're choking off productivity growth and the creation of new jobs.
----------------------
As you can see from what Mauldin explains here, Government spending hinders job long term job creation. Obama's solution is not the medicine for fixing our situation, it's the poison that's making us sick, just as all of the spending under Bush did the same. On the other hand, reducing spending, and reducing the red tape that prevents companies from hiring workers should allow (over time) entrepreneurs to create the jobs we need.