tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8802856.post112970623786824822..comments2023-10-22T13:55:34.868+01:00Comments on TechnoLlama: The Adelphi CharterAndres Guadamuzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04772686466126007620noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8802856.post-1129977198751095572005-10-22T11:33:00.000+01:002005-10-22T11:33:00.000+01:00Hi David,The statement in s9 is not a tautology be...Hi David,<BR/><BR/>The statement in s9 is not a tautology because it is directed at governments, it clearly states that "In making decisions about intellectual property law, governments should adhere to these rules..." The Charter is not a government policy document.<BR/><BR/>As to databases, the reason why the right does not work in Europe is not relevant to the size of the market, but the three recent ECJ rulings against the database right. However, the evidence remains that the absence of database protection has not hindered the database industry, hence the statements remain valid IMO. <BR/><BR/>Thanks for the comments, nice to hear from you again :)Andres Guadamuzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04772686466126007620noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8802856.post-1129790665395945672005-10-20T07:44:00.000+01:002005-10-20T07:44:00.000+01:00Hi David,I would agree that 6 is arguable, as one ...Hi David,<BR/><BR/>I would agree that 6 is arguable, as one could discuss what is "proportionate", but I would disagree about 4, as there is enough evidence against the use of intellectual property protection on raw data, facts and abstract ideas (as in mathematical formulae and algorithms). In fact, there is strong evidence that the protection of data is not necessary, as evidenced by the fact that Europe has a useless database right, while American database companies do very well without database protection.Andres Guadamuzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04772686466126007620noreply@blogger.com