Slashdot Mirror


Software Patent Demonstrations Taking Off

feklee writes "The preparations for the rally against software patents on Wednesday are running at full speed. Thanks to announcements in DWN, on KDE, in the Register, and elsewhere, the Online Demo has already more than 600 participants such as Savannah and KDE.de. Now, what about your project?"

And flagboy writes "A group of economists from Europe and the U.S. specialising in patent questions have published a letter to members of the European Parliament calling on them to reject the proposal, accompanied by an analytical paper which casts severe doubts on the reasoning behind the directive and on the methods employed by its proponents." Here's the FFII Press Release.

10 of 239 comments (clear)

  1. Analogy by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How cases of DMCA prosecution have their been? Hardly any, but that doesn't make it any more just.

    Unjust legislation must be fought. It is insufficient to simply hope it wont be enforced, like some sort of naive child.

  2. will slashdot be gone tomorow? by pe1rxq · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just one question:

    What will I see on slashdot.org tomorow???
    Or is slashdot going to mention a great idea and ignore it the day after?

    Jeroen

    --
    Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
    1. Re:will slashdot be gone tomorow? by FrostedWheat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Slashdot isn't based in Europe, so I doubt they would join the demo. Would be nice for them to do so anyway, show there support!

      One can hope!

  3. Patents are here to stay by fruey · · Score: 4, Insightful
    What is wrong with the current system is that abuse is running high at the moment. Those who have lots of intellectual property are controlling the majority of commodity software these days. The Open Source movement is gradually making inroads, but the real impact is still slight. Let's hope it can get better, it's one way that those who have can share with those that don't in a positive, free (as in speech) way.

    What people are objecting to is that innovation is being stifled by large corporations; I'm not going to mention any names, because it doesn't really matter who the company of the moment is. It's been like that for a long time, the names change but the principle is the same. The market should have more choice, but patents, buyouts, and monopolistic practices are actually supported by the current (and previous) legislatory systems are just getting more and more power. Like the hippy movement in the seventies against government powers and personal liberties beginning really to make moves against the "establishment", the yuppie move in the eighties towards personal financial freedom against the common good, the nineties technological gadget and consumerism move... and now in the 21st century people are beginning to look at inflation, unemployment and their lack of free time and starting to think maybe there is a better way. But still the rich are fighting to keep everything they have, and middle class people are following the consumer trend like sheep, they're cooling their houses with aircon, running their cars, throwing away more and more tons of garbage every year, getting fatter, and generally using more resources than they really need.

    Let us not forget that Free (as in speech) is what we are still fighting for. The medium changes, the spirit stays the same. We should not let corporate greed and a system where each year more profits need to be made become the pillar of our society, but it's been happening for years and years. Globalisation just makes this more blatent, more all encompassing, and more to the detriment of the world's poor.

    The rich are still getting richer, the poor are still getting poorer, and however many examples you give me of "land of the free" and personal gain still being possible no matter who you are, the overwhelming trend is that the masses are still being screwed, and there really are people who are born into dead end lives, and it's not getting any better.

    And still, many people will respond to my post and say I'm a socialist and the system won't really abide by that, because capitalism is here to stay and it's the only fair system. I'm not really saying that. Just ask yourself one question : are you recycling all that you can, giving a few extra minutes a day to help the looming natural resource problem? Are you using less water, using cooler washing cycles, hanging out your laundry instead of drying with electricity, keeping cool in the shade with iced tea instead of turning up the aircon a notch, eating just enough to keep your hunger at bay and giving a dollar to the bum on the street from time to time?

    --
    Conversion Rate Optimisation French / English consultant
  4. Re:The big question by el-spectre · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It makez sense that europeans would be more 'aware of the world' than americans. The US was long protected by relative geographic isolation in a way that no one in europe has been. (Canada and Mexico haven't been any serious threat in 100 years). While this distance isn't nearly as protective as it used to be, the effect on the american psyche is still there.

    --
    "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
  5. Re:Say what? by rastos1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Er ... so you don't mind your company beying sued by someone because you clean-room-implemented something they did 30 years ago and now use only to sue everyone left and right? You don't mind spending money on lawyers? You don't mind paying UniSys money for your program that generates gifs which is known format since 19xy? Where have you been, man?

  6. Re:one way street the wrong way by warrax_666 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Suppose you labor extremely hard to create something, it took so much of your time, might have cost you a marriage, every single penny in your account, and someone comes and swipes it from under your feet what would you do? Without patenting there wouldn't be much you could do now could you.


    As long as we are imagining things, how about this: You labor very hard (and independently!) on a graphical app only to find that a large corporation has a patent on "a method for conveying the intention for an action to occur on a graphical display" (ie. clicking your mouse). Who's fucked now?

    Remember that corporations can trivially afford to patent anything which does not have prior art whereas your small inventor cannot.

    In short: Read the fucking protest page and think. Please.
    --
    HAND.
  7. Re:Say what? by jeti · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The European Patent Office has already granted ~30.000 patents on software, logic and the like, totally ignoring current law.

    The majority of those software patents are trivial and overbroad. There are patents on tabs, progress bars and archiving emails.

    Developing software will become an uncalculateable risk for smaller and even medium sized companies.

    How far do you think computer sciences would have progressed if there existed patents on things like parametrisation of functions or on stacks?

  8. OK, short by Pflipp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm rehearsing this for when I jump into the camera's tomorrow :-)

    3 issues:

    1. General patentability issue

    Do patents protect and encourage the new inventor, or do they protect large businesses and monopolies? Practice would sometimes point out the last.

    2. Software patent issue

    If you invent a phonograph, you make it, sell it, done. Not so for software. Software is a stack-up of tons and tons of previous "inventions" (algorithms, or ways of doing something). You can't write a piece of software without "inventing" something along the way, but you also can't avoid to use previous "inventions". Software inventions should be seen as common field knowledge that needs to be shared. And I say needs; we would not have come past the MS-DOS age without this.

    3. Free Software issue

    Free Software doesn't only share the ideas of software, but also their implementations. Again, we would not have been far without Free Software of any kind (you can at least forget the Internet and Mac OS X, but there are more detailed examples that will tell you that you can forget A LOT of software). Simply put, Free Software relies on open (unowned) algorithms and program ideas, but has no model (like businesses have) for buying licenses to use "owned" ideas. IOW, the Free Software world would ultimately disappear as a result of patent law.

    Summary: while patents MAY stink for business in general, they would simply DESTROY our software world as we know it, and replace it with something where our normal everyday innovation is very hard to find.

    --
    "We can confirm that Debian does *not* ship the version with the trojan horse. Our version predates it." [CA-2002-28]
  9. Re:The European Patent Office is bad! by kogs · · Score: 4, Insightful
    1. The EPO is self-financed. They do not receive any money from the EU states.

      Almost true, it receives a cut of patent renewals fees from the contracting states (Art. 39 EPC).

    2. The EPO makes money from patent royalties.

      Nonsense.

    3. The EPO does not have much money.

      Irrelevant as long as its running costs are covered.

    4. The EPO is ready to accept anything to make money as long as nobody complains.

      Unsubstantiated fantasy

    5. Profit!

      But no shareholders so what reason is there for the EPO to maximise profits?

    The way it works at the EPO is the following: Someone submits something to get a patent. If it is not completely stupid, a provisional patent is awarded, even if obvious prior art exists!!! If there has been no negative comments after one year, the patent is awarded.

    WRONG - the poster was not only an Anonymous Coward, he is an anonymous know nothing.