You can’t make this stuff up. When Senators Arlen Specter and Jeff Sessions abandoned the Datatreasury amendment in the face of public humiliation, we thought we had heard the end of it. Nope. There was still one step (at least) further into the gutter that the banks are willing to go.
This time, no less (expensive) a personage as Asa Hutchinson, former undersecretary of Homeland Security and now CEO of his very own “consulting” firm, has an Op-Ed in the Washington Times (not Post, Times) that argues that America must stop DataTreasury to protect itself from Osama Bin Laden.
And here we thought this was only about saving banks from having to pay billions of dollars. Now we know it’s part of the war on Osama. Like I said, you can’t make this stuff up.
Asa’s argument relies entirely on long-discredited allegations and, in an over-abundance of blather, contends that any issues as to the validity of patents are too important to be left to the courts when they involve matters of national security.
One issue that rises above the validity of the patents is the role of the federal government in prompting the private sector to take certain actions. When the government dictates to the private sector, inevitably the latter faces certain costs. This is why government interference in the private sector should be done with extreme caution.
In this case, due caution was given, but the enormous responsibility for the safety and security of American citizens outweighed the specific and narrowly tailored costs to the private sector.
That’s right. Unless you want Osama to win, our government must seize control of the patents from DataTreasury and hand them over to the banks to use for free. The cost, shouldered by the taxpayers, is nothing when compared to the safety and security of Americans.
When the banks tried to smear the company on the last go-round, not to mention the wealth of comments left by bank shills in their effort to spin, spin, spin, their smear campaign, I thought we had reached the nadir of PR stupidity. But the level of desperation has now fallen to an embarrassing new low.
But Asa Hutchinson harping on Osama? Give me a break. This is just getting too funny.
Update: From IPI PolicyBytes, Blogger Tom Giovanetti, who I don’t know but may be a tad more conservative than me, has this to say about Asa’s Op-Ed :
Several commentors want to know “what I think now” after the Hutchinson op/ed. The answer? I now think far less of Hutchinson’s intellect and integrity than I did before reading his op/ed.
You see why he appears more conservative? I probably couldn’t think less of Asa than I did before. If anything, I’m beginning to feel sorry for him because this was so pathetic.
I am immediately suspicious of anyone who tries to cloak their issue in national security. In Hutchinson’s article, he spends his first 5 paragraphs raising the turbaned-menace, mentioning Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, 9/11, the Pentagon, terrorists, etc. This is an insulting smoke screen. The issue, as everyone knows, is whether or not it is right to specifically obliterate someone’s patent rights after having repeatedly failed to invalidate the patent. Hutchinson insults his readers by trying to sneak his issue through the smokescreen of national defense.
Well, if its a good enough reason for the USA Patriot Act, are you saying it isn’t good enough to protect the financial interest of American banks from a patent holder? So what’s your bottom line Tom?
Hutchinson’s article is an embarrassment, and should embarrass even those who are on his side of the issue.
After what the banks lost on Sessions, now Asa, not to mention all the little bank shills that run around the internet spreading the word, this has got to be costing the banks a fortune. It tells you a lot about what the true value of beating DataTreasury must be.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Smeaing?
Thanks. Fixed.
We are on very, very dangerous ground with congressional tampering with the constitutional right of intellectual property protection. Banks have claimed (or at least implied) in making their case for the Sessions Amendment to S1145 that Check 21 legislation has required them to adopt infringing technology and, that consequently, they should be held harmless. Since this is a TOTAL FALSEHOOD, “ASS-A” should ask the financial industries’ lobbyists to clearly explain those aspects of Check 21 legislation that REQUIRE a bank to do anything that infringes. It would be nice if HE was astute and assertive enough to insist on a clear answer devoid of spin and then actually seek independent verification of any claims. They should then be asked to explain why, exactly, Banks should be immune to patent law that applies to everybody else. This justification should include explanation for why the public should fund any patent royalties when infringing returns billions in operational savings to the banks!!
These are high-quality patents; to not enforce its’ patent rights would be a discredit to those who fairly and lawfully use these licenses.”
Hutchinson is attempting to circumvent the Data Treasury issue. If this charade fails, he and his cohorts have an additional list of culprits they intend to accuse. The list includes, the Easter Bunny, Santa Clause Donald Duck, Little Red Riding Hood, the Big Bad Woolf, and a number of other known Felons. Wow! I even surprised myself with that one! OK, lets take a look at the way it is. It has to do with honesty, justice and integrity or the lack thereof.
An amendment to the Patent Reform Bill, sponsored by Senator Jeff Sessions, has been withdrawn by the Senator himself. The amendment, received approval from the entire Senate Judiciary Committee. It had the backing of (The Coalition for Patent Fairness) – (fairness by definition – freedom from dishonesty and injustice). The coalition, a group of one hundred and fifty high-tech companies, was, backed by (The Financial Round Table.) The Financial Round Table, represents the country’s one hundred largest banks. These banks, now have a serious financial problem. (*They are presently involved in a patent infringement lawsuit*).A finding of willful infringement, will subject the banks to treble damages. (Three times the amount, that a jury would award, as per existing patent legislation.) The potential cost to the banks,? Billions of dollars! If passed, the amendment would have shift a one billion dollar expense, from the banks, to the American tax payer., By Senator Sessions own admission, “I don’t know how (the provision) can be modified to pass a constitutional muster. This Senator was attempting to add, an unconstitutional amendment, to the Patent Reform Bill. I question his motivation. I assure you, It had nothing to do with honesty, justice or a burning desire to perform his civic duty. The Senator stated,” I think this has more to do with lobbyists, than it has to do with merit”. ( Lets call a spade a spade). This action had to do with lobbyists, buying politicians! It had to do with, personal gain! It had to do with a lack of integrity! ( It had nothing to do with merit!)
(*The case, Data Treasury VS. Wells Fargo, and numerous other banks, was filed on Feb 24,2006 and is still in progress.*) ( Their is no room in this equation for banks attempting to buy a new law because they are dissatisfied with existing patent legislation) .These guys believe ,if you have enough money, you can buy your way in or out of anything. How about we try it the old fashion way? Lets resolve this issue in court! PS. Doesn`t Hutchinson AKA. Pinocchio, realize how long his nose is getting?
What Asa Hutchinson is suggesting as acceptable behavior in his comic strip article, is the equivalent of the banks draping an American Flag over Datatreasury and SCREWING THEM FOR GLORY!