[ILUG] Fwd: Software patents

[Colm MacCarthaigh]

On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 05:13:44PM +0100, Niall Walsh wrote:
> I assume that misleading the Dail is reason for trouble?  How's about 
> not answering a question?   

Wrapping an answer in obscurity, opacity, vaugeness and evasion is par
for the course. The answer quoted uses the same "as such" language as
the proposed directive, saying it is misleading is going a bit far.

When drafting questions for Ministers I've found it useful to a) Draft a
lot of different questions b) be as specific, short and simple as
absolutely possible.

But don't expect an answer where they don't want to give you one, they
are expert at that kind of avoidance. In such situations the best you
can hope for is that by being as specific as possible you can make their
evasion and duplicitousness more obvious. That's how it works.

> Point 1 is unanswered.   Instead (I presume) the minister says that
> consultations were made 3+ years ago.  Also it says that one body
> supported the position in 2005.   Does this mean no investigations
> have taken place?

You need to ask that specific question then. Along with simple, short,
specific questions like asking if they are aware of the differing
interpretations of the "as such" clause. 

> Time for a "We're not protesters as such" demonstration outside Mr 
> Ahern's offices?

Nope, that'd be a pretty silly waste of time. 

-- 
Colm MacCárthaigh                        Public Key: colm+pgp at stdlib.net