Research Process Patenting

[Tim Post]

I think I found the problem. This is not a list of like minded people.

Next time, you might consider using fewer words a little more
effectively.

Kindly,
--Tim

On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 13:23 +0800, Tim Post wrote:
> To further proactive thought, here are some things to think about.
> 
> Such patents would most decidedly effect adversely software and works
> created to serve the public interest, and
> 
> Such patents would most decidedly effect adversely research and works
> derived from it created to serve the public interest, and
> 
> such things need to be thought about unless we're content to get angry
> reading about new wretched patents on slashdot. We can, you know,
> anticipate the need for change and make room should unfortunate things
> occur.
> 
> I am not implying action is even needed. I'm attempting to determine if
> my concerns even have foundation.
> 
> I must ask for your kindness in helping me to understand, where was that
> not abundantly clear?
> 
> Kindly,
> --Tim
> 
> On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 23:00 -0400, Mark R Dobyns Jones wrote:
> > On 7/23/07, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at crankycanuck.ca> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 01:46:29AM +0800, Tim Post wrote:
> > 
> > > As I understand it, such direct lobbying would also violate our tax
> > > status; which is the other reason not to raise this issue here.
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > Mr. Sullivan's reply is  inaccurate on the lobbying and gag-rule topics.
> > 
> > United States tax exempt organizations are permitted to lobby
> > legislatures, within limits. This is how it is possible for United
> > States universities, and other tax exempt organizations to lobby for
> > particular laws.  There is a prohibition against tax-exempt groups
> > campaigning for a candidate for office. A lot different.
> > 
> > In general, tax exempt organizations are permitted to talk about the
> > topic of lobbying for, or potentially lobbying for something, or
> > analyzing the process of lobbying, without worry, since talk costs
> > nothing, without jepardizing its tax status. If the typical organization
> > gets serious about lobbying efforts, generally it elects to use an
> > expenditures-reporting test, so that it may know what the measure and
> > threshold is, and plan for staying below the relevant threshold.
> > 
> > For "non-electing" organizations the determination on lobbying is based
> > upon a review of all activities, so that "no substantial portion" of
> > the organization's activities may be lobbying.
> > 
> > See the U.S. Internal Revenue web site for brief background:
> > 
> > - Expenditures test election:
> > http://www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=163394,00.html
> > - The election form: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f5768.pdf
> > 
> > - The "substantial part test, for non-electing organizations:
> >    http://www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=163393,00.html
> > 
> > ~Mark Jones
> > _______________________________________________
> > Spi-general mailing list
> > Spi-general at lists.spi-inc.org
> > http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general