Slashdot Mirror
European Council Approves Software Patents
A. S. Bradbury writes "ZDNet reports that the EU Council has voted to pass changes to European patent law that will allow the patentability of software. See the FFII for more coverage. Currently, the FFII states 'The Irish Presidency's proposal was passed, with support from Germany, France and most of the other countries whose ministers had publicly promised to oppose or at least abstain. The only no vote came from Spain (to be confirmed), Italy and a few others abstained.' As you may remember, Germany had previously promised to vote against software patents. The FFII news page seems to have been showing growing support in European countries for the FFII and other organisations fighting against software patents, but unfortunately that wasn't enough. So, what now? The European elections are approaching, which means MEPs might be more willing to listen to our views than normal. Slashdot has covered software patents in Europe before."
Man, only in the EU can I get First Patent!
I'm disappointed that the German government voted for after initially saying they'd at least abstain -- my understanding is that they could have held up the process if they had at least abstained. :-(
What the hell am I talking about?
It's not so much the possibility of patents that's a threat. It's also the way they are issued.
If the european patent office seems more sane than the us (a little like the japanese seem to do) and not issue patents for obviously stupid stuff, the problem might not be that big
Artists against online scams http://www.aa419.org/
Ok, now that software is patentable, where do I apply for a process which decodes digital content which has been encoded in MPEG2 standard? And while we are at it, what about a process that converts 3 numbers which range in values from 0-255, into visible light? Or better still, converts a group of eitht(8) ones(1's) and zeros(0's) into human readable text and numbers?
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
Patent laws exist in the US and OSS continues to thrive . . .
This side up.
and you're surprised because why? contradiction, hypocrisy and breaking promises are the hallmark of liberal, representative democracy.
think of this: the number of domestic votes a country like, say, germany has that would be swayed by an issue like this is very minimal. the amount of potential campaign contributions from major software vendors, contributions that can translate directly to votes, is big. the outcome is obvious.
remember that a liberal democracy is a system whereby the rulers get votes from the poor and money for the rich while promising to protect each from the other.
2 1337 4 u!
My patent papers are in for the following ideas that I invented:
1) A method for translating program source code into a machine runnable format.
2) A method for displaying a computer's file system (see earlier patent for details) based on the top of a typical desk.
3) A number system based solely on the numbers 1 and 0.
4) A method for having sex with a computer (you know it'll happen one day... and when it does... I'm rolling in the cash)
-m
#
# Modus Ponens
#
Too late, I already patented that idea. Pay up!
I may be mistaken, but it is my impression that this was passed against the will of the EU Parliament. Yet another example of how the EU's internal structure can be undemocratic.
According to Heise (german), the Germans forced a collection of amendments through. The idea behind the changes was to protect free software and avoid trivial patents.
Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
...the Pope is found to be Polish, and bears are found to be rather partial to crapping in the woods.
C'mon, didn't we all see this coming? Did we really think that those unelected officials which govern in our name would make a decision that reflects our best interests?
Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
I'm moving to international waters... who'll join me!? We can even raise the old jolly roger. ARRR!!!
Schrödinger's cat is not amused—maybe.
Er...wait...what am I saying?
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
Indirectly.
This will hopefully hasten the collapse of the software industry, highlighting exactly why software patents are bad.
The next 10 years could really be a mess, but hopefully people will learn from it.
This is all so typical. There is always someone, somewhere trying to twist the system to squeeze out some self-benefit, but always at the greater cost of society (and ironically, also usually at the long term cost of the selfish people themselves.)
.sigs are for post^Hers.
Although I do agree that software patent laws are being abused in the US, I don't believe the idea software is patentable is categorically evil? How is software engineering different from classic engineering in this respect?
The law systems in Europe allow for less bullying by corporations. Therefore, I'm not overly concerned.
Yes of course. Luckily for people with little resources patents are dead cheap to get and support. NOT.
Please, read up a bit about software patents and it's effects before posting. The ONLY ones to benefits are the very largest companies and patent lawyers.
As a german citizen I am really angry that this happend although there was an intelligent debate. Seems like the big cash won over the judges. I am deeply concerned about what this means for the german software industry.
;-/
The sad part is that I believe that most of the propatent folks really believed that they are doing the software firms a favour and helping local developers up on their feet again. The Irony! The only thing that will probably happen is that the bigshots (i.e. Microsoft and the like) will further dominate the market instead of, growing, newcomers that could produce the next big thing and create jobs instead of outsorcing.
Look, I feel bad for you, really, but all we've been hearing for years on Slashdot is that Americans are idiots who keep electing bad leaders. The USA doesn't have a patent on bad lawmaking, so please keep that in mind, would you?
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Besides, what kind of dorky attitude is it that nobody should be allowed to build on an idea for twenty years?!? Imagine that somebody has had a trivial idea and you get the same idea from elsewhere, and build something much larger on it. Well, you cannot use your ideas for the next twenty years if the first person has patented it.
But there does look like there is some hope quote "The catch is that if the Parliament still doesn't like software patents, it has to have a majority of all MEPs to put its amendments, which means that in practice they need a two-to-one or three-to-one majority in the chamber,"
Hopefully this draft gets stopped in the next round of voting. If not, this could be a very bad thing for Europe developers of OSS.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3726375.stm
They say that the patent plans have been shelved indefinately. Who is right?
When this sort of thing happens in the US, there is a huge cry of "you don't like it, you voted for them. Vote them out." Well, now it's time.
I'm in the US, so I can't do it this time. But to all the Europeans on Slashdot: Your own governments just lied to you about an EXTREMELY important issue. Your own representatives said they would vote against software patents, and then voted for them. Your next move is very simple.
1) Send a letter to the appropriate bureaucrat stating that you are upset, and inform them that they have lost your vote.
2) In the next election, send a letter to their opponent telling them why the incumbent pissed you off (software patent support), along with a check.
3) Vote for the challenger.
4) Watch as a few people wake up and realize that the voting public is not completely stupid and full of sheep.
5) Profit (not in money, but in Freedom).
Your turn now. You take out those bosos while we work against George "Fascist" Bush here on this side of the Atlantic. If you don't, you only encourage our slide into an information dark ages.
--GrouchoMarx
Card-carrying member of the EFF, FSF, and ACLU. Are you?
Maybe your right about software patents not being a bad thing. If the patent office really does look for prior art and not present patents with prior art. This could be very hard though. They also need to not give a patent to a vague concept.
Evolution or ID?
In a surprising development, internet news site Slashdot has become one of the first companies to apply for a European Software patent. The patent, describing the proccess of "seeing into the mysterious future by becoming a Slashdot subscriber", has caused much controversy over karma whoring. In response to the controversy, one Slashdot reader said "Imagine a beowulf cluster of karma whoring /. subscribers rushing to apply for various patents at the announcement that EU software patents have been approved."
In related news Slashdot is reportedly in the proccess of filing for another EU patent for the beowulf cluster.
Full Story at 10:00
France, Germany, and the Netherlands reported larger-than-expected budget surpluses, and the BSA is auditing every local and state government in Spain.
Not all bad news, though. Microsoft reported that its cash reserves decreased 0.0023% in the last day alone.
The only companies that will be able to not only fund the process of registering patents, as well as the legal staff to sue violators will be large corporations.
Small companies will have their ideas stolen, and will have a choice: either fight, and end up going under due to financial burden, or try to compete, and hope that they have a significantly better mousetrap. Given the software patents that I have seen, that is not likely, and the monopolies will win (yet again).
As for Open Source - we have always been targets, and will continue to be so. However, we don't have the deep pockets and there is plenty of prior art on our side (hence only SCO being stupid enough to go after us, thus far, and then having to pick IBM as the surrogate 'deep pocket' for their purposes) - meaning attacks on Open Source will continue to come through FUD, as opposed to patent law in most cases.
IANAL - so don't base any business or personal decisions on my advice.
Lodragan Draoidh
The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
If you, as a small-time developer, hold a patent on an algorithm, you can be assured that the mega-corporation that "steals" your idea will hold a number of patents on things you do. They can cross-license with you (ie. you get nothing but the opportunity to remain in business), or they can litigate you to death. In no circumstance will you come out ahead.
Patents may have been conceived as a means to protect "the little guy," but nowadays, they're nuclear weapons on a very small battlefield. Your bombshelter is not deep enough.
-Hope
Not quite. Their amendments were gutted of the most important parts. Here an extract of the Italian speech, nicely summing up the situation:
Basically, the German amendment was meant to define what "technical contribution" means (i.e. sth technical, with the exception of anything that happens within the computer itself). Now, what's left are vague formulations such as "computer programs as such are not patentable", etc. which have been shown to be weasely and highly ambiguous.Say no to software patents.
The protection that we need is the protection from getting sued if we have an innovative idea and dare to publish the resulting software. Software patents make great weapons against small developers who cannot afford a patent lawsuit.
If you put it out there and don't get a patent then you can use it and it then becomes prior art to any patents. If you can't afford a patent lawyer then just put it out there. If someone else patents it then yours is prior art to theirs.
Besides, what kind of dorky attitude is it that nobody should be allowed to build on an idea for twenty years?!? Imagine that somebody has had a trivial idea and you get the same idea from elsewhere, and build something much larger on it. Well, you cannot use your ideas for the next twenty years if the first person has patented it.
This concept can be held to any kind of patent. From engines to circuit boards to anything. So, your saying there should be no patents. No IP protections.
Evolution or ID?
This afternoon, 5 of us officially presented a petition against software patents to Dutch MP's responsible for Economic Affairs.
:)
:(
:(
We were rather lucky, since one of us had good contacts with one of those MP's, who was sympathetic to us and had considerable influence, resulting in a quick arrangement to hand over the petition. Normally, the procedure would have taken weeks.
Many MP's were quite interested in our information, and were particularly concerned about the fact that our minister of Economic Affairs, Laurens-Jan Brinkhorst, who was to vote in the EU council on our country's behalf, had apparently misinformed our national parlement.
They even announced they would be holding an extra debate, probably tomorrow.
During the day, we were kept informed through our mobile phones. It was nerve wreckening. We kept receiving conflicting reports about wether we would be getting a majority against or not. Near the end, we even heard that the Netherlands would probably have the deciding vote! You can understand that nearly drove us crazy.
Eventually, the news broke...
And again, mister Bolkestein seems to have played a crucial role on the side of the software patent supporters.
On behalf of all the people in the Netherlands, I would like to apologize to all the people of Europe for mister Bolkestein. He makes me ashamed to be Dutch.
The fight is not over, however! It will be more difficult now, but the European Parlement seems to be really pissed, and most Eastern members that are joining the EU now (and will be part of the parliament after the next elections in June) appear to be opposed against software patents.
Also, it amazed me how easy it can be to get in touch with influential people, as long as YOU KNOW THE RIGHT PERSONS that have the relevant connections!
In spite of the defeat, I'm still impressed with the difference we managed to make today. At least more people in our government are informed now. And we won't be giving up the fight! We made a few mistakes the last few days (hey, we were new at this), but we also accomplished a lot and also learned A LOT of lessons.
I would like to end this post with two pieces of advice:
1) I'm calling upon ALL European Citizens to VOTE IN THE NEXT EUROPEAN ELECTIONS! Even though there is much wrong in European politics, not using your vote and at least applying that little influence you do would be insanely foolish!
2) Let's all coordinate our lobbying efforts! If you have even just one or two hours a week available to help out, spend it by contacting certain EP's (preferably try to start a dialogue with one or two specific EP's, so you can concentrate on them and build up more personal relations) and contact FFII to notify them of your efforts and inform them who you are in contact with. There were only five of us, and look how far we have come in only 5 days time!
Let's get to work! Autumn will be upon us before we know it! And the elections are even less than a month away!
"Oooh, does that mean we get to kick some puffy white mad zionist butt?"
Actually, you can use the idea - you just have to pay royalty/licensing fees to the patent holder for its use - provided you sell or distribute your product publicly.
On the other hand, you can build whatever you want using whatever ideas that are available in your own home for personal use without any concern for patent issues. That is why I am not too concerned about this.
So, all of the geeks will have the cool tools, and all the poor lusers will have to pay 'Acme Software' for their fix.
Lodragan Draoidh
The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
:-(
The new parliament will have to vote on this, and the new parliament is going to have a lot more right-wingers from several countries (Germany, England). We will have to see how they vote.
Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
if there is hope, it lies in the proles.
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
File patent after patent until the system dies. This is the only way to kill the beast.
Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son.
"Son, I hear you're in the European Parliament."
"Well, I do dabble in politics on the side."
"Good. Here's a list of bills I'd like you to introduce. If they pass, you'll get a little something extra in your Christmas bonus packet this year. If they don't, well, you know the consequences..."
"Mandatory Overtime?"
"You got it, kid."
And now they want people to care enough to vote?! Not me.
Karma: Excellent (My Karma? I wish...:-( )
Thats from the article....
Now WHO THE FUCK told them they could throw those two cats in the same bag?
NO SIG
At this point, it still has to go back for a "second reading" to the Parliament. Considering that, in addition to the original issues, this is now seen as a challenge to democracy and the role of the parliament in the EU, it seems likely that the parliament will soundly reject it.
On the other hand, some amendments were made at the last minute which convined a number of the representatives; since the parliament version was also this bill with amendments, they might have actually passed that version.
"If you can't afford a patent lawyer then just put it out there. If someone else patents it then yours is prior art to theirs."
Yours is prior art to theirs _if_ you can _prove_ it is in court. Which rather requires that patent lawyer you couldnt afford in the first place.
If you cant afford to patent something there's no way you'll be able to defend yourself when someone else steals your idea, patents it and claims they were first, then proceeds to sue you for patent infringement on something you invented in the first place.
That sure is going to have such beneficial effects on that 'innovation' thing...
Why do some people *need* to hate an entire culture of people? This decision within the EU doesn't prove that Europeans are liars and pushovers anymore than it would mean that if passed in any other country. What it *does* mean is that politicians are politicians regardless of what country they are in and will always cater to special interests, regardless of what those who elect them actually want.
Anthony Papillion
Advanced Data Concepts, Inc.
"Quality Custom Software and IT Services"
This concept can be held to any kind of patent. From engines to circuit boards to anything. So, your saying there should be no patents. No IP protections.
There are arguments to be made that patents are never good, for anything. And I have yet to see an independent study that proves that patents are a net benefit.
But that wasn't really what he was arguing. What he was arguing was that 20 years is way too long for patents in the software industry, even if you concept software should be patentable. The software industry has lifecycles of 2 to 5 years (most products inching closer to 2 than to 5), meaning you go through 4 to 10 iterations of your product before your patent expires. That's too much. 2 or 3 product iterations is ok, but more than that is not in the public interest. And remember that patents, copyrights and trademarks are meant to serve the public interest, not the corporate bottom line.
Besides, just look at the examples of long lasting patents on useful stuff that expired. Take the patent of RSA. Once that expired we've seen a dramatic upsurge in encryption products. Before it expired, ssh was a niche product, now it's often the only way to log into a system. That single expiration brought dramatic benefits to the entire software industry. I'm not saying the original inventors shouldn't have benefited from their invention, but the RSA patent held back strong encryption, and the products based on it, for two decades.
Besides, I think there's something seriously wrong if the only way we can reward inventors is by handing them absolute monopolies for two decades. Solve the cause, not the symptoms.
I'm going to patent the Windows 2000 source code that is all over the internet! (disclaimer: I never downloaded or looked at any part of that code)
Anyone else?
Whom shall I vote? The guys which lied to me about what they would do, or the other guys, which didn't lie to me yet? The only thing I can be sure of is, that whomever I vote, they will lie and turn for the people with the money.
This is SO frustrating and SUCH a shame for democracy.
Sometimes you can't eat as much as you want to vomit... (Manchmal kann man nicht soviel Essen wie man Kotzen möchte)
I am European.
I think we should form an European association, a la NRA, where we promise to all vote against any party pushing for software patents, regardless of all other issues.
We are a lot to oppose software patents, and if we unite and call for vote against all parties supporting software patents, we will be heard. No political party can loose millions of vote in European elections, with their huge absention rates.
If we organize, we are strong enough to stop this outright corruption of "our" officials. I will tomorrow write a letter to my representative, stating him that should he opposes software patents, he'll get my vote, and that should he supports software patents, he'll never get my vote. I will also try to contact any association in my country (France) to see if we can organize some counter-power.
I am ashamed of this shit, I am ashamed of my government, and I am ashamed to be a citizen of such a corrupt system.
I won't leave a world to my children where they can't express mathemacial equations (software is just that) without being sued. I think i've never fell that motivated to engage in political action.
To all you slashdot europeans : do not drop arms. The fight is not over yet, and the incoming elections give us much power. We shall unite and fight. We shall not let software become patentable.
>>This concept can be held to any kind of patent. From engines to circuit boards to anything. So, your saying there should be no patents. No IP protections.
Yes I am saying that there should be NO patents. Patents have held up great break through's in the adoption of technology, over, and over, and over again!
Examples:
1) Car, Henry Ford to mass produce cars had to circumvent the car patent.
2) Laser, until the patent expired lasers were for the rich or unique. Now you can buy a laser at every corner.
3) GSM, while there are patents involved the reason why it worked is because everybody decided to forgoe the huge licensing fees.
4) And lets not forget software AND hardware, which to a large part worked wonderfully WITHOUT patents.
Patents are monopolies that only cause adoption rate of technologies to be 20 years delayed. I agree with copyrights, trademarks, and industrial design. The reason I agree with those is because they protect VERY specific designs and texts.
Patents these days are NOT for the small time inventor, but solely for the large corporations. Personally I would rather have a corporation rip off my product, as I can rip off their's as well.
Now about the R&D argument and that it would never happen. Well look at the examples where patents were avoided and the results is that the markets are BIGGER without patents!
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
Hmmm... option 1) Have your employer arrested. Consequences: Further more subtle harrasment at work, company profits tank, company may go bankrupt, sending you job hunting. Or... option 2) Take the thick wad of money on the table, introduce bills that make your employer more profitable, you get big bonuses and high job security.
The number of principled people who would take option 1 over option 2, and also be the type to 1) run in, and 2) be able to win an election is so vanishingly small as to be non-existant.
"Unheard of means only it's undreamed of yet,
Impossible means not yet done." ~~ Julia Ecklar
But with all the thievery of intellectual property, and all the monopolizing tactics of the biggest corporations, maybe this is the protection that the individual/small corporate developers need?
Copyright law already provides authors with protection from their works being stolen. The concept that ideas are ownable (which is what software patents boil down to) is silly and wrong.
Liberal (adj.): Free from bigotry; open to progress; tolerant of others.
It's the truth of this kind of cynicism that makes things suck.
I hope you don't mind if I take the liberty of correcting a slight editorial error...
Daniel
Hurry up and jump on the individualist bandwagon!
Let's be honest this is yet another permanent employment act for Brussles aparachiks. The act says they will permit patents to be filed. It says nothing about how many millions of Euro-person-hours will be required to be granted one.
These are the people who have 80 page specifications for a bus steering wheel. Can you imagine the requirements for a successful patent that has to be passed in 25 countries at the same time?
``Yours is prior art to theirs _if_ you can _prove_ it is in court. Which rather requires that patent lawyer you couldnt afford in the first place.''
One of the differences between how lawsuits tend to work in the USA versus how they tend to work in Europe is that in Europe, the winner is usually compensated for the costs they made. Which means that you _can_ afford a patent lawyer - if you have a solid case.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
This whole software-patent thing has nothing at all to do with protecting ideas. Right now, anyone can get a degree, download the java sdk and eclipse and write good software. By screwing everything up so that you need a legal department to write code, the big software companies hope to make it so that little guys are excluded.
The goal is to create what economists call 'barriers to entry' into the software development industry. Because barriers to entry make it expensive to enter the industry, firms can increase prices farther than they otherwise could because competition will only enter the market if their potential profits exceed the start-up cost. Creating a menace to FLOSS is icing on the cake.
I know, I know, IHBT IHL and I'll HAND. I just wanted to explain this to the people who modded the parent up or read it.
bollocks. Just write down a description of your idea, have one or two people sign/date it, and have it notarized. No $500 an hour patent lawyer needed. This is what a group of patent lawyers told the software development group in a persentation on what we should keep an eye out for with regards to patentable work, while I was working at Optical Solutions in Minnesota. Note to those who have heard of it, mailing it to yourself doesn't hold up in court. You can steam open the envelope and reseal it with whatever you want inside. The lawyers said, repeatedly, have one or two people sign and date a description, and have that notarized. Cheap and easy way to establish prior art. Just don't loose it.
--rhad
Slashdot needs to interview Natalie Portman.
I'm calling upon ALL European Citizens to VOTE IN THE NEXT EUROPEAN ELECTIONS
For who? The vote is in the next week or two and I don't know anyone who's against this crap.
Give me a name and I'll vote.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
Quite the opposite. We need to hurry up and get Sterling into the Euro. Then the dollar will go through the floor, the American economy will collapse, and maybe the EU will stop modelling its laws on what's 'obviously' working so well for the USA.
You have a misunderstanding about patents. if someone patents something, and you come up with an improvement to his idea, you are free to patent your improvement. The fact that you must get a license to use his patent in order to use YOUR patent is just part of the patent concept.
Likewise, if he than improves upon YOUR idea, he must get a license from YOU to use his improved idea (which is based on your improvement to his original idea).
Now, it is possible that someone will refuse to license his patents. I am unsure of the legality of this. However, this does NOT stop you from developing improvements to his patented idea, and patenting them. And he is NOT free to use your patents just because they require his patents to be useful. "Derivative works" are protected under Copyright, NOT under Patent Law.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
This is just going to force innovation away from the West and into the hands of emerging powers like China and India.
While the US and the EU commit ritual suicide via patent litigation and red-tape, the East will be making leaps and bounds in closing the innovation gap and capturing market share.
Outsourcing has already created the business channels and the beginnings of infrastructure to allow those nations to compete directly with the West. The only thing missing is innovation, and here it comes.
Has no place in this world anymore. We can scream, we can rally, and we can vote, but it doesn't do a damn thing to the outcome. All that matters to those in power is the money changing hands.
It is rare that public outcry ever changes laws, especially when money is the primary motivating factor for congressmen.
Just recently the US Supreme Court *upheld* a law that is essentially a gag-order on the NRA during election time. Free Speech is prevented, and the NRA cannot speak out again any person running for office for 2 months prior to the election. The opposite is not true however - the candidate is provided full free speech against the NRA during that time.
Get out and vote! HA! What a crock of shit anymore. Better that you just give large cash donations if you want your opinion heard.
-- If we don't stand up for our rights, now, there will be no right to stand up for them later.
The UK is indeed a member state of the European Union.
http://europa.eu.int/abc/european_countries/eu_mem bers/uk/index_en.htm
Now, we have to take the action: ...[your ideas here]...
1 - Create one OSS/FS patent pool for defensive protection
2 - Enhance Open Source Licenses patent-defensives
3 - Ask/"Open Letter" to *all* companies supporting Open Source movement asking for explicit promise to not use software patents to attack Open Source software. Please, ask to IBM, HP, Oracle, Sun, CA, Veritas, Novell, Fujitsu, Dell, etc.
4 -
I'm not sure how it works when your applying for software patents, but if you're applying for a patent on anything else there are certain rules that must be followed. The idea ( a machine or whatever it maybe) can not have been known to the public, scientists or researchers prior to the application. Therefore the patent office will search news and scientific papers to see if anyone has come up with the idea before. The application must also show an noticeable uppgrade of an old way of doing things or a completely new approach. One can therefore not patent opensource software without braking the rules already set by the patent officials. You must also provide a working prototype or approved technical drawings. This means you cannot patent something that has not yet been invented. -Lars
The talk will then be followed by round table comments and discussion by Euro-candidates from all of the political parties. Come along, and tell them what you think.
The event is free, and all are welcome.It's a 300 seater lecture theatre, and this has had to be organised at the last minute, so help us get the word out. Let's show the candidates that swpat is something we really care about.
Im European by the way, and strongly believed that this crap would never pass. Americans are welcome to point and laugh at me for my ignorance.
In some respects, innocense is ignorance; do not be ashamed of innocense.
God, fucking stupid politicians, they don't know shit about software and should keep away.
Problem is, politicians are by nature corrupt. No, every politician is not corrupt; but many are, and the carreer attracts those that love power for the sake of power. It doesn't take but one or two of those to ruin the whole batch, as they introduce corrupt bills (such as this patent "reform") that are sponsored by those with deep pockets and deeper self-interest.
In this case, the politicians that don't know shit about software were encouraged to vote, and educated by, the ones with the most self-interest in this perversion of knowledge ownership. And all they saw were the most "important" players in the software industry backing the bill.
The problem isn't politicians, per se, its the corporate influence on politicians that fuck things up so badly. Once the government starts serving the corporations instead of the people, we are screwed. And that has started to happen.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
You are right that if I am a megacorp with millions of dollars I have a good chance at being able to license any particular patent for proprietary software development. I happen not to be a megacorp, and I happen to develop free software. I don't realistically have a chance to pay patent royalties even for a proprietary product, much less the royalties that would make the patent holder license their patent for all free software.
Yes, I can develop improvements and patent them, but not use them. GREAT! So not only can I not use the idea that the other person has patented, but nobody else can use my idea, either! (Except if they have the pockets to give me a good deal.) What a wonderful world!
Even if the small company wins they stand to lose. Look at EOLAS, they won the case, they got awarded millions and then MS had the patent invalidated (pending). You think the patent office would listen to you or me or EOLAS if we attempted to invalidate an MS patent?
I think Jesse Jackson put it best "Capitalism without capital is just an ism".
evil is as evil does
After reading the language, it looks like you could write a 'software pattent' for the 'process' of collecting taxes, or even the process of voting. Because the language doesn't limit this to being applied to a single program or executable (presumably to pattent office suite style interactions between software packages,) this could be applied to the use of the software the EU currently uses to conduct elections and collect taxes. Even if one did not write any one, or even any of the applications used. Using them together for an expressed end is patentable.
I am actually being serious here. Patent parts of the Govt. and charge them. The easiest way to show the harm these patents can do is to inflict that harm on those who allowed it to happen.
This is exactly what you need to communicate, that it's easier than you think to influence people in the right position to do something about this mess.
There's also a big point in making things visible and digestible by the general populace. Most people don't know patent law, but use the analogy about patenting the recipe for bread, and they get it pretty quickly.
The FFII people have done an excellent job, but with a clearer message and more planning for the demo etc, they would have had far more impact.
So now's the time to make sure the European Parliament doesn't approve this. Get up, contact the media - radio stations, TV, newspapers - and let your voice be heard.
I'm personally going to do this even if I live in Norway (which is outside of the EU), because the important people here have close ties to people on the inside of the EU parliament.
We have nothing to lose, everything to win. Get up, get out, and spread the message. This cannot continue.
Hey, how does one set up Apache to exclude a list of countries from access to a site?
In theory, if they owe those who give them money, then they should owe the American public. In reality, the more they can get campaign financing from this fund, the less favors they need to owe to special interests, which is good for the public.
True, but why stop there? If politicians owe nothing at all to special interests, it would be even better for the public. So let everyone pay a little more taxes to fund election campaigns and drastically limit the amount of cash a politician can receive from other places.
That's the system in Europe. Why it failed in this particular case, I don't know.
"Hell hath no fury like a hippo with a machine gun."
I would further like to encourage German readers to write an email or fax to the federal minister of Justice to complain about her decision and to support journalists in decoding the network of what seems (on first sight) filthy lobbyism and inconsistent behaviour. Written letters and faxes are expected to have more impact due to their tangible nature.
If you don't spend EUR 1 on a stamp now, you might have to spend EUR 10000 on lawyers later, or get fined for using an algorithm that somebody happens to have patented without you knowing.
[E-mail me if you can't find your rep contact details but would like to do something about it.]
Ideas should be free.
The bill has to pass the EU parliament a second time, make your voice heard.
Soon are elections (mid june)
check out which politions oppose the software patents, write to your representatives of various parties and try to make your voice heard.
And for christs sake, go voting this time, the EU parliament usually has a low voting percentage, strengthen those who oppose this bill.
People like McCarty, Fortou and Boelkstein have to be voted out or at least weakened.
And for all citizens in the new nations in the EU, please do the same, you now have a good chance to get your economy up, but this bill would cause the same problems in your countries as it does over here in the good ole, west.
Here is a relevant quote stright out of the latest EU portal newsletter (europa.eu.int/newsletter/index_en.htm):
One more thing to keep in mind during upcoming referendum(s) on that constitution.