Slashdot Mirror
Europeans Still Battling Software Patents
rimberg writes "The FFII in the UK is issuing an alert
for
all supporters to write
to their MPs -- this weekend .
In September the European Parliament voted for strong
restrictions on software patents. But these could be set
aside at a meeting of the EU's Competitiveness
Council of Ministers on 10 November. The ministers' meeting is to be "prepared" at a meeting of senior patent
officials from across Europe even sooner: this Thursday 23 October. Unless they can be convinced otherwise before 10 November, it is
believed that UK ministers will push for the Council to adopt a November 2002 draft
text, which is even worse than the infamous McCarthy
report. The European Parliament's rules for second reading make it
very
difficult for MEPs to fix a bad text from the Council.
The FFII says it desperately need a lot of letters to go out to MPs this weekend to tell the Government how bad the November 2002 draft is.
More information at FFII-UK."
Are they trying to kill IT in the UK or what?
The smaller companies will suffer when patents are phased in and it is these smaller companies that employ workers in the UK. The larger organisations are on the whole moving many jobs to countries such as India.
Copying form letters is very bad - they don't get read. But if you're wondering about how to use LaTeX you might want to look at some stuff wot I wrote earlier today. (mp_letter.tex in that directory; the other .tex files are earlier stuff.) I don't want to hold it up as a great exemplar though... write your own words and opinions. (But follow the FFII guidelines!)
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
If software patents were kept in place Linux developement taking place in Europe would basically stop. Are they trying to kill open source or something? I thought some countires in the EU were trying to adopt Linux and open source software not kill it.
Ironic, but in a few years looks like the centers for IT innovation will be China and Russia, mostly China, where respect for patent system and intellectual property in general is quite low.
Why does it never seem to stop, this desire to place constraints on consumer choice?
People get tired of the constraints being placed on them so they create their own, only to then have a persistant effort to take their choice away from them.
With technology making it easier and easier to create, you'd think the exclusive rights would get shorter and shorter, so as to re-emburse for R&D.
I tried visiting
http://www.knoppix.org for the first time about 2 weeks ago and was greeted by bad news about European law in the works.
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
I'm sure we have all grown tired of hearing snobby UKians touting their political stablitiy with phrases like, "Geez, I'm glad I don't live in the US." Well, I'm glad I can finally say that I'm glad I don't live in the UK.
http://www.weebl.jolt.co.uk/misc/badger.swf
Closed because of "Software-Patents"
In the next few days, the European Parliament will decide about the legalisation and adoption of so-called "software patents" in Europe, which are already
used by large companies in other countries to put competitors out of business. This can lead to the termination of many software projects such as
KNOPPIX, at least within Europe, because the holders of the over 30,000 already granted "software patents" (currently without a legal foundation) can
claim exclusive rights and collect license fees for trivial things like "progress bars", "mouseclicks on online order forms", "scrolling within a window" and
similar. That way, software developers will have to pay the "software-patentholders" for using these features, even in their own, completely self-developed
applications, which can completely stall the development of innovative software for small and medium companies. Apart from this, the expense for patent
inquiries and legal assistence is high, for even trying to find out if the self-developed software is possibly violating "software-patents", if you want to
continue to market your software.
Contrary to real patents, "software-patents" are, in the current draft, monopolization of business ideas and methods, even without any tangible technical implementation.
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
Sorry about the formatting, I should have used preview.
Or maybe not, no doubt Preview is one of those patented technologies and I'd have to pay up.
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
So it's feared that the UK minister will be led by the UK patents lobby. Does anyone have information on how the ministers from other countries are expected to act? Is this expected to be a close call? Are there any countries that are clearly on one side or the other?
Do we have anything going on in Congress to limit the scope and term of software patents, and/or increase the effectiveness of the USPTO, or are we still just venting about it?
I would love to, hell I want to, all I need is a stamp envelope paper, time to sort out and get my printer working, probably only 15 minutes all in all, so why do I always wuss out.
Pleeese pleese pleese don't be a looser and a dork like me and send a bloody letter to your MEP.
To answer your question, Germany and France are not likely to agree with the UK position as it is laid out in the article. The EU institutions are notoriously slow-moving and since they showed what they feel on the subject not long ago, they are unlikely to fall prey to lobbying so soon after. Also, lobbying in the EU is not as organised as in the US - most European citizens regard the semi-formal lobbying process in the US as absolute proof of corruption of their political system.
Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
In this day and age, writing to your MP or Senator just has no effect. Instead you should send cash or blackmail threats. However, many people simply dont have enough money to initiate a bribe, but dont worry! thanks to capitalism, you'll soon be able to bribe someone even on a low budget! Bribe Agencies will allow many people to concentrate their money into one bribe which can be sent to any participating politician (i.e all of them). I for one cannot wait for this, it will open up bribery to even the poor!
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Considering that mechanical realisations of software can be constructed, I see little point in "battling" them, as they're fully tangible, patentable ideas.
As opposed to the US?
That's the real issue.
The EU institutions are notoriously slow-moving and since they showed what they feel on the subject not long ago, they are unlikely to fall prey to lobbying so soon after.
The European Parliament showed how it feels not long ago i.e. anti-software patents. The European Commission seems to be on the other side. Now it's the turn of the Council of Ministers. There is no reason to automatically assume that they support the European Parliament position, though it would be nice to think so. That's why I was asking. Anyone have any knowledge of this? Thanks.
I'd suggest you contact them in the UK, France, Germany and Italy (and in their respective languages) as these countries hold the most MEPs in the EU Parliament, and therefore the most power and votes to pass this.
Comment: Yes I realise the username 'fuckfuck101' makes me sound intelligent, no you cannot buy it from me.
The poor europeans will be crushed by the suddenly vaild American software-patentes we have been creating over the last 10 years. EU firms have had no need to create patent portfolios - and will be defenselss to American lawsuits when the EU allows software patents. There will be no 'cross licensing' because EU companyines have no patents to cross license with.
Software patents are horribly evil, and if the EU is stupid enough to follow the us Americans, they will be *very* *very* sorry.
All your EU companies are now belong to IBM, MOT, and MSFT.
Moneyed corporations, non-working 'poor' and criminal prisoners are turning productive citizens into tax-slaves.
What ever you may think of the drug addled rants of the robIE guy, he is not a troll.
I'll be metamoding for the next several days in hopes of getting this one. As a true troll, I don't like the "brand weakening" of the name, caused by applying it to any post that didn't tent your pants.
what a clueless neo-marxist. The day of reckoning will approach you with little pity.
UK has casted itself aside from relevancy in the EU policy-making process in most subjects.
Yeah yeah whatever, the UK holds 87 seats in the EU parliament, if you think that ain't power you're sadly deluding yourself. Most EU countries listen to the UK, it's only countries like France and Germany who believe they own Europe.
Comment: Yes I realise the username 'fuckfuck101' makes me sound intelligent, no you cannot buy it from me.
Why the UK government is fevereshly working on killing the entire EU IT industry.
Is this some kind of late revenge for all the anti EU propaganda which has been done by the UK press?
My message to the UK government, hello, anybody home, there are people in the EU who really want to work in the field without having to deal with laywers day in day out.
nt
You are deluding yourself if you think that the European Parliament gets to make any serious decision. That's the job of the Council of Ministers and the Commission. By opting out of many EU initiatives over the years (social charter, Euro) and blocking others (common foreign policy, common defense), the UK is going AGAINST most European nations. Also, 86 (not 87) seats out of 623 is insignificant. France and Germany (whom you outright discount) together have 186 seats. Not enough to make policy, anyway, so I wonder what your point was.
Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
Unfortunately you are wrong here, the problem is the german gov is strongly pro software patents.
Because the EPO is located in munich, they have a handful of people who try to push the patents through although the majority of the industry doesn't want them.
The main proponents are a well known state sekretary, the EPO, Siemens and two self proclaimed lobbying groups of the german IT industry (which ohly support the agendas of Siemens not their smaller members which they basically sell off), the Bitcom and the Vereinigung fur Informatik.
I'm not sure if this pro software patent pressure of those two lobbying groups is simply stupidity or corruption but I assume both.
The problem is, that leaving two or three big companies aside, their members consist mainly of smaller companies, single working persons and small businesses which would suffer most, from rampant going laywers. (Germany had a few cases of those in other fields in the past, and they just wait for getting the next income weapon in their hand)
Letting patent lawyers decide what should be patented - is like letting generals decide when to go to war.
the UK has casted itself aside from relevancy in the EU policy-making process in most subjects
The views the U.K. holds with regards to the direction European policy should take are perfectly valid and reasonable - it has _not_ cast itself aside. The problem is that France and Germany want European union while having sole control of European policy - as we can see with the disgusting Common Agricultural Policy. Perhaps France and Germany should leave the European Union and set up their own little enclave since they have no interest whatsoever in the thoughts of any other member state ?
Those crazy Europeans, always trying to copy the latest American fad.
When ever will they learn?
-Adam
Before being ensnared by AI, I got me a degree in economics and studied patent theory relatively deeply, its origins, it supposed motivations to protect innovation, etc, etc. At its roots the ethics behind patents are honorable, but in the modern world of software development seem far more to protect the big guns from competition, as opposed to encouraging independent innovation. 5 YEARS ON I'm now developing on a bleeding edge software project, utterly original, which has by necessity at its centre a patent. This is essential to allow the project time to grow unnopposed without remaining hidden from the coding community. Pure open source development of this work could well end in brain stunted corporate imitation or BeOS style tragedy. Its finding the right balance... patents can help us non-corporate guys to seriously change the world. They *can* be good imho. (remember even linux had some basis for its design already researched and developed in the shape of unix api) Patents should exist to allow us R&D and time to setup, hopefully for the good of everyone...but not to monopolise and stunt creativity for decades, and thats the point. Balance and Tao.
This may be the best opportunity left for you to prevent software patents in your own country
The United States Patent Office and the Japanese Patent Office have already achieved their goal of software patents in their own countries. The European Patent Office (supported by all the European national patent offices) is the third partner in the Trilateral Commission, and if it is able to legalize software patents in Europe, each partner will have a very strong position of apparent international legitimacy from which to fight any backlash in their own regions.
And then, rest of the World, watch out.
Between them, these 3 regions have a massive amount of economic power, and they will push the rest of the World to follow their lead on the software patent issue. This will be done through the world trade and intellectual property organizations (WTO and WIPO), where the countries on the receiving end of this pressure will probably concede the issue, given that they have more important issues to fight about (such as farming subsidies). Not that they'd necessarily want to fight it, since most governments' advisers on the subject (patent lawyers) are generally strongly in favour of extensions to patentability anyway.
So, the best remaining opportunity for you to remove or prevent software patenting in your own country may be to help fight it in Europe. If you are not European, you obviously don't have any direct say in our democratic processes, but you could still give secondary support. I guess the best way would be donating your time and money to the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure. Here are the links:
But if you don't think it's right for outsiders to interfere in other countries' political processes, tell that to the BSA (which drafted the original directive proposal), and the US Government (which didn't like the proposed amendments). And when they ignore you, come on and help the good guys.
P.S. I don't speak for the FFII, I just don't want to see software patents (generally unfair restrictions on people's right to write and distribute their own software) seriously harm computing all around the World.
P.P.S If you are an EU citizen, make sure your government knows what you want it to do at that November 10th meeting.
Exactly!
The only difference is that while the generals in all civilized countries would also agree that it would be a seriously bad idea to let the "experts" decide instead of the democratically elected institutions, there are plenty of patent lawyers that openly argue that the field of patent law should be above the reach of the democratic process, and should be dictated by the patent lawyers themselves.
I wrote a reply to one patent lawyer who was expressing that idea, and repost it here:
Democracy may not be so bad after all
In the ZDNet article Software patent limits 'go to far' , legal expert Alex Batteson argues that although "it may seem undemocratic", the outcome of the recent European Parliament vote on software patents proves that the issue is too complex to be handled by the parliament, and should have been left to the experts.
While I agree with Mr. Batteson that the issue of software patents is far too complex to be handed over to the European Parliament in the manner that it was, I still have to disagree with him when he suggests that the matter should be handled by the patent lawyers instead.
I have just spent an entire day going through the amendments that the European Parliament made to the resolution before adopting it, just to form my own opinion as to whether FFII, the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure, really has a leg to stand on when it describes the resolution as a victory for the opponents of software patents. As I am neither a lawyer nor a politician, but merely a programmer and citizen, I wouldn't really have gained much insight by just reading through the resolution as is. Instead, I went through the amendments one by one and checked what the FFII had said on each issue before the vote, and what they said afterwards.
After having gone through this process, I am now prepared to agree with the FFII that the adopted resolution is indeed a victory, and that it is a good thing that it passed, but like I said, it took me a day of reading just to reach this conclusion.
It is quite obvious that it was completely unreasonable to expect the parliament members, who would normally neither be programmers nor patent lawyers, to vote together a consistent legislative proposal in a plenary session lasting less than an hour, squeezed in between a resolution about the situation in Iraq, a proposal on European energy taxation, and a statement on the fisheries agreement with Mauritius. I think that the fact that they nevertheless managed to put together a good resolution does them great credit, and shows that many of them must have realised that this is an issue that deserves to be taken seriously.
But how did it come to this?
Well, this is where I have to disagree with Mr. Batteson's position, and state that I prefer the democratic road, despite all its shortcomings. While it is doubtlessly true that a group of patent lawyers working behind closed doors would have come up with a legislative resolution that was technically much more consistent, it would have been a resolution with radically differen
Christian Engström, Former Member of the European Parliament 2009-2014 for The Pirate Party, Sweden
Please no-one use this "as is", especially if they live in Cambridge; I only want to encourage others to craft a decent letter.
Dear Anne Campbell,
A few weeks ago, I emailed you concerning software patents, with patent laws being passed in the European Parliament, and soon to be put through to UK law.
Last month, the European Parliament voted for strong restrictions upon software patents, but it is my understanding that UK ministers at the Competitiveness Council of Ministers are likely to push for the Parliament amendments to be overturned. This would be a disaster for software development within Britain.
The UK Patent Office have been lobbying for unlimited patentability, and whilst their consultation found a lot of support from patent professionals were in favour, the views of programmers were extremely hostile. Strong patent laws are not good for the industry, although they might be good for big companies: in the USA, large companies build portfolios of software patents, which creates a minefield for programmers, as every program contains steps which could be considered innovative, meaning that before long, it becomes impossible to write programs of any complexity without stepping upon some of these patents. Although these patents ultimately might not stand up in court, the fear of law and the resources of large companies means that the interests of smaller outfits and individuals are overwhelmed. This is not an efficiency, for the cost is not the natural cost of doing business, but an artificial one of compliance with the regulation.
I should add that in the USA, cross-licensing of patent portfolios is commonplace, creating government-enforced cartels, as those working for such companies don't need to worry about compliance. This is actually proof that patent laws are inefficient, since firms would rather absolve one another of their patent obligations than enforce them. An excellent case against software patents is put forward by Laura Creighton, a software venture capitalist, to be found at http://www.vrijschrift.org/swpat/030508_1/.
I am faxing, as well as emailing this letter because of the urgency of the issue: there is to be a series of meeting of patent officials throughout Europe on Thursday 23 October ahead of the meeting of the Competitiveness Council of Ministers.
This is a serious worry for me, and not a theoretical idealisation. Everyone that I know in the industry has told be how worried they are about what future laws we are likely to end up with. I hope that you can put the case to Stephen Timms MP, the minister for e-commerce at the DTI, and cast your vote at a future date against an excessive patent regime.
Yours sincerely,
Tim Wesson.
Wikileaks, no DNS
I got one word to describe you : SUCKER!
I faxed all 10 London MEPs a few weeks back. I've had half the responses back (I was sure to ask a direct question or two). One or two MEPs are suprisingly switched on to the issues involved. Of course, there's also the quintessential MEP who gets his PA to respond, and says very little so as not to infer an opinion either way.
Either way, faxing my 10 MEPs took me about an hour (from starting to write the letter (not pinching someone else's), printing it 10 times and faxing it to the 10 different numbers). It's dead easy, and you should definitely do it.
The list of MEPs can be found via http://www.europarl.org.uk/uk_meps/ and should you be even slightly interested, my experiences with them are at http://www.coofercat.com (search for "european"). You might also like http://www.faxyourmp.com
Re:Knoppix is a victim too -for lazy people
Or karma whores.
Please do NOT copy this word for word. Personal faxes are better. Here's an edited version of my fax:
Dear Mr David Drew,
I am writing to you to make you aware of a very real problem that will affect the computer industry in the UK. I am a technical consultant for a software division of the ********* - one of the largest IT services companies in this country. I care passionately about this industry and want to see it succeed. Unfortunately the British Government is being encouraged to promote a draft resolution concerning software patents ("Directive on the Patentability of Computer-Implemented Inventions") that will cause great harm to many companies in the UK.
As I am sure you are aware, the idea of patents is to foster innovation by encouraging individuals and companies to make public their work in exchange for certain rights (e.g., royalties obtained through licensing). While this concept works in many situations, the use of patents in computer software is damaging the IT industry by doing the exact opposite that was intended. This is the situation the United States finds itself in where software patents have been granted for several years.
The main problem with software patents is that it is extremely difficult for non-technical individuals to determine whether a patent is actually valid or whether it is either obvious or subject to prior art without a significant investment of time and resources. As you can imagine, this places a great burden on the organisation responsible for granting the patent. The US Patent Office has typically dealt with software patents by granting them and allowing any dispute to be argued in the courts. This has resulted in a climate where patent portfolios are used as negotiation tools when dealing with other companies - you can safely infringe on other companies' patents if they infringe on yours, creating a patent "stalemate". This is leading to a stiffling of innovation, especially with smaller companies without a portfolio.
On the 24th September, the European Parliament voted on a directive that included an ammendment that would prevent "a drift toward US-style patentability of pure software and business methods". Unfortunately, the European Commission are hostile to the aforementioned ammendment and are threatening to remove it. The British Government is being encouraged by the UK Patent Office to push a November 2002 draft that removes the ammendment in favour of a patent "free for all". The European Parliament's rules for second reading make it very difficult for MEPs to fix a bad text from the Council. Therefore is is imperative that the best possible text is promoted by the British Government.
If the November 2002 draft is accepted, it will have a negative impact on the IT industry in the UK. The only people to benefit from such a law would be the US IT industry that already has a huge patent portfolio and patent lawyers. Everyone else will lose.
A petition of over 288,000 names has been signed by people who work in IT in Europe and recognise the impact that software patents will have on both the industry and the economy. For more information on how widespread the concern for this issue is, please consult http://patents.eurolinux.org and http://swpat.ffii.org/
I appreciate that the issue of software patents is dry and not particularly interesting, but in the interests of the software industry in this country, I would ask for your help. Please could you bring this issue to the attention of Mr Stephen Timms, the Minister for E-Commerce at the DTI, forwarding my concerns.
Thanking you in anticipation.
Regards
Everyone that I know in the industry has told be how worried they are
I hope I've caught you before you sent it.
D of I .... when was teh last time you really read it?
Thanks, but too late :-(
A quick Google, and I find this old chestnut. Original author lost in the mists of time...
SPEL CHEQUER
Eye halve a speling chequer.
It came with my pea sea
It plainly marques four my revue
Miss steaks eye kin knot sea.
Eye strike a key and type a werd
And weight four it two say
Weather eye am wrong oar write
It shows me strait a weigh.
As soon as a mist ache is maid
It nose bee fore two long
And eye can put the error rite
Its rare lea ever wrong.
Eye have run this pome threw it
I am shore your pleased two no
Its letter perfekt awl the weigh
My chequer tolled me sew.
Wikileaks, no DNS
If your company is being bought up, broken down, and sold off in pieces it means that your management and upper-level employees suck balls. Basically, the scavengers think that your management and those that drive the company offer negative value.
What a wonderful place you must work.
It's mostly because of American pressure (and lobbying) that Europe is forced to change and level with the US. Please don't play innocent on us.
Looks like a fair cop guv.
I'm starting to think that perhaps the European politicians in question simply didn't realize how controversial the issue of software patents really is. And maybe that's why they keep leaving unfinished business on the table -- it provides the big, deep-pocketed corporate players in the game with opportunities to give the politicians even bigger bribes in order to get their way.
(For those of you in the United States who do not understand this strange word "bribe", it simply refers to the illegal exchange of money in order to reach some selfish political end; here in the US it's referred to as a "campaign contribution.")
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Hi,
I know the situation is quite bad when it comes to people - it seems many people have become quite apolitical, they only seems to care about what they do tomorrow but simply don't care on what and who is ruling them. It' catastrophic!
Now for politicians: Of course they accept the message which the big origanisations and the patent offices and the patent lawers are telling them - if nobody is really competing with them at the same argumentative level.
That's of course a challenge to take, it's definitely not something for loosers! It's somethings for winners and we won the European Parliament on September 24!
Ok, the directive was passed at this point, but not before amending it to the extend so that it prohibits patents on pure software.
Maybe it was an easy win in comparsion to the things coming up now, but we can only live up to this challenge work together and get the best strategy and make it reality!
Now for what's to do now:
- Join the ffii-uk list on ffii.org.uk (even if you are not in the UK)
- No, don't fly to Brussels now - the council will meet in Brussels but the ministers meeting there will be OUR national ministers ask your national parliaments who will be going there or ask at the ffii-uk list for help.
Personally, I own the C++ loop code.
for ([number type] [variable] = [starting number]; [variable] [operator] [ending condition value]; [variable][shorthand operator])
{
// Code goes here
};
PAY UP, CHUMPS!
This is just a general opinion. Related to the software patents, the same applies.
Also: The council has not the absolute power. If the Europeanparliament is strong enough in it's opinion(like it was already in the 1st reading), it can fix or reject the whole thing again, see the picture on this page
I think everything from one click shopping to the XOR cursor should be covered by patent and the originators of these marvelous inventions should jealously guard their efforts by every legal means. This would be a great start ... at stopping the motor of the world.
Anyone who truly believes in all of this pie in the sky free software nonsense needs to just opt out of society. No one *cares*. You'll get no money, no grattitude, there is nothing but abuse for the creative and financial reward for the sleazy. Some of the sleaze is what is called mooching, some of it looting. If you're of the building persuasion, just stop sharing yourself for a bit and watch the sparks fly.
If your sweaty little fingers are all aquiver to either reply to this in a clueless fashion or mod me troll, I suggest you go forth and google for "Atlas Shrugged". Better yet, go get the book and read it. If you have absolutely no idea who Ayn Rand is or why that book is important you have no business at all responding to this. I feel like I should sign this "Richard Halley".
I am very easy to get along with, but I don't have time to waste being nice to people who are being stupid. -Theo
But I really think this needs to be up top of the thread. The instructions on the linked pages assume you're a UK citizen. Many of us are in other european countries, and even if we aren't citizens we know and have influence with those who are. Time is short. Any help with what a Swede, a German, a French, an Italian, etc. should be doing today?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
and then click on "Member of European Parliament" (just under ABC).
But right now you should contact your MPs, not your MEPs.
I'll readily admit I'm a newbie on how all this EU archism is supposed to work, can you explain it, or point me to a decent explanation?
I recently moved to an EU nation, and noone here seems to understand it any better than me. Do you think that this might be a problem?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Quite the opposite, sounds like a fed-up anarchist to me.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
This was right a few years ago before the Tready of Maastricht(1992), there is the co-decision procedure which changed the role of the Europarl from a consultative to decisive body which the Council of Ministers cannot ignore anymore.
This procedure has been improved with the Amsterdam Treaty from 1997.
Short overview of the EU Treaties
Now, the European Parliament can even send the European Commission back home and even menioning this possibility in the past made a huge impact, so it can be considered very powerful institution nowadays!
I think the problem with the non-knowledge of many normal people about how the EU works is that there is no real education going on (AFAICS) which really covers EU topics in depth in local news papers and TV stations(at least in Germany)
How long does your company need? 20 years? Thats a lot by any scale in the high tech world. Factor into the current situation the litany of trivial patents entering into the system and we're running head-on into a situation where products and services that might of been viable become unfeasible due to licensing costs owed to companies that have never manufactured a thing in their existence.
The problem is that the USPTO, for all intensive purposes, has abdicated its responsibilities and is now just rubber stamping things and leaving it up to the courts and the vultures that thrive there to determine if something should remain patentable.
The one-size-fits-all patent system needs to be dissolved. Period.
It needs to be replaced by something that recognizes real innovation whilst also taking into account both how that idea would be used by the owner of the patent and the real cost of the innovation in the first place.
Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
I think the best thing you could do is visit europa.eu.int and try to understand for yourself. Somewhere in the site, btw, there is an option for receiving literature and leaflets for free detailing new EU developments. I get a couple every month and the odd book every now and again. Free, of course.
Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
Unlike the effort in Europe to actually change the law, software patents in the US are a result of the US Supreme Court's interpretations of existing law.
The US Congress played no "direct" role in the creation of software patents in the US, rather it was a series of US Supreme Court decisions (Gottschalk vs. Benson - 1972), (Parker vs. Flook - 1978), Diamond vs. Chakrabarty - 1980), and (Diamond vs. Diher - 1981) which expanded the scope of patents to cover software.
The US Congress did, however, during the 1990's change the laws to shorten the term of all US patents to 20 years.
Hopefully, the European Parliament will be able to see through the dis-information spread by the FFII, the Eurolinux something or other, and pass meaningful legislation this time.
Let us also hope that members of the Open Source movement will refrain this time from sending death threats to MEPs who do not support their radical and uninformed position.
The forces of capitalism will win in the end. Just bend over and take it. Fighting only makes it hurt.
I sent a letter to our PM Balkenende and his department expressing my concerns:
www.minaz.nl/minister-president/vragen/index.html
(in the bottom of the screen, there's the link to use to write your concerns to Balkenende)
The more people that write, the more likely we're being heard!
UKians? Jesus, what's wrong with 'British' ?
And besides, you're wrong - we managed to get our MEPs to change their minds the first time about patents, we'll do it this time as well.
Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
Your governments will be represented at the November 10th meeting and at the preparation meeting in 4 days time. Make sure they know what you want them to do.
You should probably join the relevant mailing lists for country-specific information. They're listed here along with a long list of other stuff to do.
Well, UKians includes Ian Paisley/Gerry Adams. Hmm, is this a bonus?
The European Commission is completely undemocratic and some also say, it's corrupt(look for subsies in the articles).
There are also MEPs, especially in the JURI committee(a commitee of lawers) which only saw this from the law view and not from the political view and stayer very much on the patent office view, except for one amendment, the interoperability amendment.
But fortunately, the parliament consists of 625 members from all member states and the patent family didn't convince enough of them to close eyes and send this thing thru. This is where the power lies. We the people of europe, have the power to speak with our local representative and they have the power of their vote, and they excercised it on September 24th.
In this very moment, the European Parliament has demostrated that it is a absolutely democratic institution which takes care of their constitutionents and does not follow special interest groups alone - if they have the backing of the people in doing so. So write your MPs and tell them that tell them what you see.
And if you think the power to elect our representatives is not sufficient because they don't hear us, we have the right to demonstrate and we did it in Brussels, Strasbourg, Munich, Berlin, Stuttgart and Vienna!. This is what makes us really heard if you feel your MP is not listening. Subscribe to the mailing lists and come to the next demonstration or organize one with your Linux user group if you are upset about not being heard!
I also don't question that the US may have the largest amount of public and private R&D investment, but I don't think this was very different 10 years ago when(I assume) there was not this much difference in the interpretation of patent laws.
Some years ago, Europe was also still a big step behind the US, when thinking of the common currency.
Europe will also to integrate many new countries into the Union soon which are not as developed as the other nations and finally, I don't need to evangeise the US what is best for their country, but also please let the EU find out what it thinks is best for it.
However, it can be beneficial to not have patent protection in fields where innovation is incremental, normally rather cheap(having an idea), where is not much cost to produce(distributing software over the internet) and where the time needed to get the investment into idea back is normally rather short.
Even if one says that software should be protected by patents, there is still the argument wether it's good to allow the patent holder to block any commerical use which logically builds on the patent for 20 years
At least something should be improved as long as there are the cases like Amazon's one click patent and the Eolas case where the "infringers" have to pay for quite nice ideas but where the litigation today can only be desribed as insane.
These are only some examples, there is more where one can go on and on, e.g. in Germany, people get letters to pay 2000 Euro because they have put their city's abbreviation behind their domain name.
Correction: The Parliament showed its concern about software patents last month.
But the Nov. 2002 draft was written by the Commission and the Council of Ministers. (Or rather, the Commission industrial property secretariat, and national patent offices from across Europe). These people -- including the negotiating teams from Germany, France etc etc --were 100% for software patents then, and still are now.
The parliamentary first reading vote is treated as little more than an 'opinion' by the rest of the EU law-making system.
The Council of Ministers *will* pass the November 2002 draft -- *unless* we can educate enough ministers in *all* of the countries of Europe, and persuade them to overrule the interests of their national patent offices.
I'm posting as an AC because I'm not reading this at my own machine. The reason I wrote this alert from a UK perspective is because that is where I live, and that is where I know the political system.
But the truth is that we need a wall of letters right across Europe to arrive *now*, if we are to have any chance of influencing the meeting of patent officials *this Thursday* which is supposed to pre-arrange the decision of the Council of Ministers.
JPMH.
I imagine the decision will largely be down to horse-trading. The UK government, and probably most others don't give a flying fuck about their software industries. They'll sell out their huge software industries to get a few billion more subsidies for their farmers.
About the sellout of the software industry: Tell it your MP, another point which he'd have for rebut.
Many MPs offices have a very low budget and could be a golden opportunity for spreading the word about Open Source software. I could start with mine, but I think that it may need something bigger like an "Open Source Parliamentary Group". It must be cross-party to ensure that continuity can occur after elections.
They do have some budget, so there would be opportunity for small incomes to be made, though.
Actually, there is no need to convince your MP using the open source argument, SMEs and independent software developers generally have difficulties on dealing with patents.
0 23221 3&tid=
Normally they have not patent department, no money to split off from development effort to inance the process of getting patents, and no left to finance patent trials.
The Summary from a study says:
- Broader patentability of software seems not desirable:
- the lower level of protection is no locational disadvantage
- companies oppose US model
- international, strategic use of patents obvious, but concentrated on relatively few large companies.
BTW:
UK Gov't Considers Expanding Open Source Use
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/12/
If people can get in with MPs by giving them support for their offices at real cut prices, there's a possibility that we can start to influence them.
Most of them know very little and are lobbied hard by large corporates who make donations to party funds. Getting the MPs to realise that there are serious alternatives to the models proposed by those companies to improve the software industry is what is required.
Without patents in such fields, companies would have problems to justify high research and development investments if there is no confidence that they will get the invested money back because anybody would be allowed to copy the research and finally destroy the income needed to pay the research.
I want to add that e.g. in the pharmaceutical sector, you have only a few big companies which can really innovate in this market and a product is usually covered by one patent to protect it.
Compared to the software sector, there are 100.000s or maybe even millions of small and independent developers which all they need is a computer with a programming language installed.
Software patents protect the pure idea, and as the process of coding and debugging is not considered as and inventitive activity, the thing which is covered by a software patent is the pure thought.
Of course, all of us can have resourcefull ideas, but is this at the same time an invention?