Article from CRN.com (English)

One of the better-known principles of hypnosis is "If you say something often enough, people will believe it."

In the case of the above statement, Mr. Gates again repeats a huge assumption which passes directly to the subconscious mind simply because the conscious mind is busy trying to wrestle with this "scenario which didn't exist in the past." Of course the scenario didn't exist in the past; computers, software, and the internet didn't exist in the past. But the principles have been debated for at least several centuries. The real question is this: Is "Intellectual Property" real, and should it be allowed a monopoly status through patents and copyrights?

Thomas Jefferson, one of the intellects who designed the US form of democracy, said "He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine receives light without darkening me." Whether an instruction is verbal, on a sheet of paper, or encoded on a hard drive makes little difference to the principle in its most basic form.

Certainly Jefferson knew the value of patents; he received the first US patent for a "hemp breaking machine", and his own signature is on many early US patents. But he also realized the inherent dangers of granting patents too easily, and had this comment in the same year the patent was granted about his invention: "...as soon as I can speak of its effect with certainty, I shall probably describe it anonymously in the public papers, in order to forestall the prevention of its use by some interloping patentee."

Another few quotes from Jefferson which show his ambivalence towards monopoly of "Intellectual Property":

"...a machine of which we were possessed, might be applied by every man to any use of which it is susceptible, and that this right ought not to be taken from him and given to a monopolist."

[The patent monopoly is] "a reward, an inducement, to bring forth new knowledge."

"...generally speaking, other nations have thought that these monopolies produce more embarrassment than advantage to society; and it may be observed that the nations which refuse monopolies of invention, are as fruitful as England in new and useful devices."

All quotes are taken from this PDF (English).

The real question we (as software users) should all work through in our own minds comes to light from this discussion: In the long run, is humanity better served by granting monopoly rights on mere methods of executing computer instructions? Should someone be able to prevent others from using a particular sequence of instructions running in a CPU?

Besides the intellectual arguments, two other factors have influenced my own opinions in this regard: 1) The mere existence of Free Software shatters the idea that there needs to be a monopoly inducement in order "to bring forth new knowledge"; and 2) The deception and trickery used by most of the proponents of any of the "Intellectual Property" licensing and patenting schemes currently in vogue, such as Mr. Gates' statement in the above referenced writing, make me very suspicious of their real motives.

- Willy Smith, opining from Costa Rica