Slashdot Mirror
Sites Shut Down to Protest Software Patents
blueser writes "I went today to TUTOS homepage to check for a newer version, and I was surprised to see that the author replaced the homepage by a 'Closed because of Software-Patents' page, with a brief explanation." Just one site? that's hardly a big deal, but there's more. maliabu writes "Knoppix is closed, apparently waiting for the European Parliament to decide about the legalisation and adoption of so-called 'software patents' in Europe." And still more. SLbigE writes "The Wine HQ website has temporarily shut down its webpage in protest to a proposed law in Europe regarding Software Patents." There's many more sites as well, these were just the first I was alerted to, Feel free to note some more in comments. Looks like they're doing a good job of illustrating what could be lost soon.
Details of the campaign against software patents can be found at http://swpat.ffii.org/group/todo/index.en.html
This post will enter the public domain 70 years after my death, unless Disney buys another extension.
Gimp is another...
Who doesn't like free music?
This letter is worth reading ...
gtk is another site that is protesting. Good though, if you look at the rubbish pattens which are already registered (illegally) in Europe, ...
Genius doesn't work on an assembly line basis. You can't simply say, "Today I will be brilliant."
http://wiki.ael.be/index.php/OnlineDemoPartnersWeb sites
for a full list of website participating in the action.
You can also add your web site if you participate in the online action against software patents.
"Slashdot is not, however, even though some have requested it be taken down for the day..."
Well, someone has to be up to let people know what is going on.
If you live in the EU, don't just sign the petition - email your MEPs explaining why they should oppose the motion (and reminding them - gently - that they want your vote!). Yesterday I emailed all 10 MEPs representing London explaining my concerns, and I've already received 2 thoughtful responses -- one of which was seemed convinced by my arguments.
Probably the best arguments to use are those against patenting algorithmic business methods (also covered by the directive) rather than software per se, as they're more likely to be appreciated by politicians. My example was patenting an 'algorithm' that uses a number keyed in by a bank customer to verify their identity against the account details held on their bank card. Hey presto, your "software patent" gives you a monopoly on ATMs.
You can find a list of UK MEPs at the European Parliament's UK Office. For other countries, check out the main EU parliament website. Note that each constituency is represented by several MEPs, allocated between different parites by proportional representation. The vote on the directive is next week, so email your MEP today!
The author of this post asserts his moral rights.
The list of websites that've shut down is here (two and a half thousand sites so far)
My site is shut-down.
Others include KDE, Gimp, gnu-darwin, GNU-savannah, and most of the French and German linux sites.
None of these sites shut down. They simply replaced their index page with the statement, which also provided links to the old index. Hardly shutting down.
Software patents are serious.
Yes, they are serious. I've been bombarding my local MEPs about it. And recently I got a very interesting response.
It made me think that maybe we misunderstand the proposal - especially after it was recently been amended.
I quote directly from Article 4a:
Exclusions from patentability:
A computer-implemented invention shall not be regarded as making a technical contribution merely because it involves the use of a computer, network or other programmable apparatus. Accordingly, inventions involving computer programs which implement business, mathematical or other methods and do not produce any technical effects beyond the normal physical interactions between a program and the computer, network or other programmable apparatus in which it is run shall not be patentable.
Justification
This, in conjunction with the corresponding recital, provides clarification that simply specifying technical means is not enough for patentability. There must be a technical contribution. It also makes it clear that the computer implementation of a business method simpliciter is not a patentable invention."
IANAL but to me that satisfies everything we, as Free Software advocates, are seeking? Why are we so strongly opposing this? If you read the full directive, it sounds fairly sensible.
Free Gamer - Free games list and commentary