NewsForge On U.S. Advice To EU On Software Patents

An anonymous reader points to Roblimo's "interesting article about how the U.S. sold out to software patents and the EU should as well." Should be of interest to Europeans, forced as they are "to suffer from willy-nilly software development by individuals who have not been screened, approved, and trained by corporate human resources professionals."

Comments

Jury's Out.

[Altima(BoB)]

I can see this going either way.

On the one hand, like the article mentions, Europe has a lot more socialists who aren't fans of Big Business. And they were the people who were actually able to succeed in nailing Microsoft with that big antitrust fine. (Sure that's not patent per-se, but given that every second slashdot and fark headline these days is a new rediculous MS patent, it fits.)

On the other hand, speaking from Ireland, multinations with lots of patents like Microsoft and Intel have become rather cozy here, but the tax breaks that used to be unique to foreign companies settling are disappearing from here and being imitated elsewhere. I know the local government in Ireland would be open to US style patent laws if it will keep foreign investment and jobs coming in.

Re:Jury's Out.

[Tranzig]

Don't forget that already over 30000 (unofficial and not enforcable) software patents granted in the EU. Just imagine those poor corporations. They spent a lot of money on researching and filing out-of-law patents, all for nothing! Any sensible politician would say yes for the software patents I guess.

Re:Jury's Out.

[Anonymous Coward]

But the Irish people are pretty amazingly ungovernable, even by Irish people. If the patent situation gets too bad, there will be an "adjustment".

Re:Jury's Out.

[Anonymous Coward]

rediculous

RIDICULOUS. LIKE RIDICULE. Christ, why can you people never get it right!?

Re:Jury's Out.

[jd]

Eventually, as with any addiction, it will be impossible to break free. The strain of the withdrawl symptoms would kill the patient. Carrying on (and dying from the addiction) becomes the preferred option.

No country can survive indefinite foreign investment. Some is good, but things have gone far beyond "some", for Ireland, England and many other nations.

It's a standing joke that the only road car actually made in the UK is Japanese. For a country that once prided itself on the works of Jaguar, Rolls Royce, British Leyland, Rover and Granada, that's been no small collapse. British shipyards lie derelict, with all the jobs overseas. Britain is a rusting hulk, with little left that's native and functional.

To get back to the patent topic, the situation can only get worse in the EU, if software, algorithms and business models can be patented. It's far too easy to get such patents in the US. Dangerously easy. As the blizard of US software patents worsens, EU companies will find themselves legally barred from competing on any front.

The EU may see this as easy money, but the reality is that it might as well collectively agree to gas the whole of Europe. It'll be quicker, less painful, and less stressful on the unemployment figures.

Re:Jury's Out.

[Anonymous Coward]

Please note that most Irish people I know (including myself) would consider that a compliment, not flamebait. Though it's not particularly true, unless you're fond of "no true scotsman" fallacies. It's easy to find Irish people throughout history downright happy to throw themselves into the arms of foreign domination, from McMurrough the Betrayer to Mary Harney. You can't just say "ah, but they weren't _true_ Irish". They may be scum in the eyes of us true Irishmen ;-), but they're still Irish.

Re:Jury's Out.

[JaredOfEuropa]

Europe has a lot more socialists who aren't fans of Big Business

Socialists, bah! There are plenty of MEP hopefuls who are against US-style software patents; you should be able to find one who espouses your other political convictions as well. If you're Dutch, check here for a ranking. All Dutch MEPs, except the ones from one party, voted against overly broad software patents, so take your pick. The one party that voted for software patents is the VVD party to which Bolkestein belongs. If you remember, he's the commissioner who's been trying every which way to get the new patent law approved, sometimes by blatantly undemocratic means.

The FFII has an overview of the voting track record of the MEPs of all countries, but their site appears to be down at the moment.
br. If the issue of software patents is important to you, this is the one subject on which it is quite easy to find information, both on the subject itself and on the voting track record of MEPs up for re-election. No matter if you're a green, socialist, conservative or christian-democrat, there will be a candidate to your liking who is also against software patents. Research your choices beforer you step into the voting booth this Sunday! (or today if you're Dutch).

Re:Jury's Out.

[Tjebbe]

You know, this has actually been an argument from some of the pro-patent lobbyists here.

"There are already patents being granted so we'd better make it legal"

It is just wrong in so many ways I couldn't even believe it.

Re:Jury's Out.

[kraut]

>No country can survive indefinite foreign investment. Some is good, but things have gone far beyond "some", for Ireland, England and many other nations.

Evidence, please?

> It's a standing joke that the only road car actually made in the UK is Japanese.
Actually, car production in the UK is alive and well. Bentley, Rolls Royce, Ford, Nissan, Hyundai, Vauxhall, Rover, Jaguar, Lotus, Caterham, Morgan, MG, and I'm sire I've missed a few.

> For a country that once prided itself on the works of Jaguar, Rolls Royce, British Leyland, Rover and Granada, that's been no small collapse. British shipyards lie derelict, with all the jobs overseas. Britain is a rusting hulk, with little left that's native and functional.
Well, yes, Britain has suffered sixty years of continuous mismanagement, both politically and economically. I fail to see how foreign investment has made the situation worse, though.

Re:Jury's Out.

[Anonymous Coward]

TVR

Re:Jury's Out.

[irokie]

we had RMS over in Trinity (College, Dublin, Ireland) giving a talk about the Evils of Software Patents.
Patricia McKenna (Green MEP/MEP Candidate) got up and she was talking about how they only narrowly defeated some bill that was going to enforce software patents... And yet patents were still issued. Her point was how low the awareness of this issue is. If people don't stand up and take notice, this is going to go how governments want it (Ireland currently holds the EU presidency. And their sponsors for this term? Microsoft).
The voting is tomorrow. If you're in Ireland vote for Patricia McKenna, she knows the score and doesn't like software patents. If not, make your voice heard - vote for your local Green Party candidate.

Re:Jury's Out.

[Anonymous Coward]

A country's industry does not have to be manufacturing-based for it to be succesful. In fact I would argue that one of the main economic mismanagements of the late 1900s was to try and artificially preserve that manufacturing base in Britain. Hooray for Thatcher! (cowers).

Re:Jury's Out.

[ista]

Those "poor corperations" are usually corporations like IBM (e.g. progress bar) or Sun (shopping cart in web shops).

The majority of those patents have been filed by non-EU-companies, and even most of their claims are just based on the line "we managed to patent this in the US, so acknowledge this patent for the EU as well".
As the european patent office gets money for issuing patents and not for giving out legal advisories, they issued those patents.

If those patents were actually set in place, most EU companies who relied on the more than 30 years old laws forbidding to patent computer programs or math algorithms are deep in trouble: they would face a new legal situation and market, where the non-EU-companies who filed those EU-patents are definitely in advantage.

See swpat.ffii.org for more information on the situation of software patents in the EU.

Re:Jury's Out.

[Deusy]

The EU may see this as easy money, but the reality is that it might as well collectively agree to gas the whole of Europe. It'll be quicker, less painful, and less stressful on the unemployment figures.

So Hitler wasn't a madman after all!

Re:Jury's Out.

[jafac]

You don't have to be a Socialist to not be a fan of Big Business.

Big Business gets lots of perks and handouts from the Government. (patents, limited liability, public resources, free roads, free educated workers, free military action, tax breaks, government funded R&D, protective regulation, tarrifs, etc, the list goes on and on).

'Advice to the EU'

[Nicholas Evans]

First of all, why does the EU want the US's advice? The title makes it sound more like we're just running our mouth's. The EU doesn't much like us at the moment, and this just helps to foster the whole 'america gets up in everyone's grill' image. =/

And secondly, why doesn't the EU want advice from the guys down in the trenches? Is it impossible to get some body of government that listens to the people instead of greedy corporations who pay them off?

Yea, well. We can all tell I'm high. A government for the people? Pfft. I must of taken some baaaaaad LSD.

Re:'Advice to the EU'

[BiggerIsBetter]

"Advice" in political terms is usually another way of saying "veiled threat". Many of the companies pushing for software patents are American. Big EU software houses like SAP *don't want them*, but the US is trying to look after it's own big IT businesses. If EU doesn't bend over, there may be trade or policy repercussions.

I didn't RTFA, because the quote made my knee jerk and my brain think OFFS! "to suffer from willy-nilly software development by individuals who have not been screened, approved, and trained by corporate human resources professionals." Firstly, what does HR know about software development? Secondly, have they forgotten that much of this IT stuff has started form individuals developing stuff willy-nilly in basements and sheds around the world?

I've had a gutsful of companies and governments sidelining the individual for the sake of a few large corporations. I was going to say I think it's about time we (the willy-nilly developers) stood up to be counted, but I don't think it would help. We'd have to storm the relevant summits or similar, and even then we'd be called terrorists. We're just consumers in their eyes, and the thought of the common people doing anything significant without their approval scares the shit out of them.

Re:'Advice to the EU'

[imkonen]

"I didn't RTFA"

And yet somehow you and the parent post seem to have missed the sarcasm contained therein.

Re:'Advice to the EU'

[Anonymous Coward]

RTFA moron.

European elections

[simgod]

We will se on Sunday how much power we have. Vote for the Greens!!!

Re:European elections

[Xerp]

Indeed. I am voting Green also.

Check your region

Note the Liberal Democrat's standpoint!

June 10th. Vote Green.

Re:European elections

[Anonymous Coward]

NO! Because the greens are against everything else too. Nuclear power is only one thing.

Re:European elections

[Some Bitch]

Indeed. Last time I looked they were against international and even most intra-national trade, their ideal being something along the lines of self sustaining communities.

In short, they are a bunch of raving loonies. Should fit right in with the rest of the politicians...

Re:European elections

[Anonymous Coward]

Already done...

Re:European elections

[ultranova]

Indeed. Last time I looked they were against international and even most intra-national trade, their ideal being something along the lines of self sustaining communities.

Actually, this is a good idea - we are way too dependent from centralized power and water systems, making us far too vulnerable to accidents, natural and otherwise.

For example, here in Finland the autumn storms black out large areas each fall, and because the power companies can't be bothered to hire enough people, it takes weeks to repair the damage - and in Finland, when you're without power at late autumn, you will get a little cold ;(.

The areas where the power will be returned last are, understandably, the small communities far from city centers. If such communities would have their own backup generators, they could sustain at least basic functions (heating, water supply) while the problem was being taken care of.

Also, imagine what would happen if someone would add poison to a large city's water supply. Or whatever bacteria causes cholera. Not a fun image.

And imagine if someone would build a huge scyscraper and rent it as office room, and someone else would realize that "Hey, we can blow this one skyscraper, instead of having to destroy hundreds of office buildings separately !" ?

So no, wanting to decentralize does not make one a raving looney. You never put all the eggs in one basket in any other activity, so why would you do so in society either ?

There is reasons to criticize the greens - such as opposing nuclear energy while demanding decrease in air pollution, leading to an impossible equation - but this is not one of them.

Depressing issue.

[rice_burners_suck]

to suffer from willy-nilly software development by individuals who have not been screened, approved, and trained by corporate human resources professionals.

And this is to say what? That corporate human resources "professionals" know anything about software development? I suppose the next thing they'll believe is that programmers who learned to program in school know anything about programming.

I have some experience with that second one. I know a few people who studied programming in school, not really knowing anything about it beforehand. The way they studied made no sense at all; it was a process of memorization, like memorizing a multiplication table. This applies to everything from language syntax to design patterns. These schools turn out programmers who think they're hot stuff because they can churn out word processors using VB#.NET or whatever. There isn't the sort of deep-rooted philosophy about software design, the base in mathematics and logic, the science of the machine, or the art of putting together computer programs that accomplish a job, scale well, fit together within the overall field of computing, and age well too.

I don't know what to think about this industry. What happened to the few really good programmers who could make amazing things happen with a basically crappy machine with barely any memory or other computing resources? What happened to the respect that used to apply to this field? Nowadays, it seems like corporate managers look down on the programmers and the software, as if it's a given that software is some mindless trivial crap that takes two seconds to bang together, and the fact that it takes a really long time to engineer is scorned and look down upon.

The issue of software patents stems directly from this. There is no issue of learning or advancing the field. It's simply looked upon as a bunch of flash cards that need to be memorized, and each corporation is trying to jump on that and patent as many of those flash cards as they can. Want to use a 'switch' statement? Pay $500 per application instance, or an annual fee of $5,000,000. It's just a nominal fee...

Depressing. Free software needs to win the software war as soon as possible.

Re:Depressing issue.

[Kwil]

See that thing passing way over your head there?

That was the sarcasm in the line you quoted.

However, your exemplary slashbot behavior is sure to be rewarded, as from your post it's entirely obvious that you managed to avoid getting anywhere near the article, never mind reading it.

Re:Depressing issue.

[morcheeba]

to suffer from willy-nilly software development by individuals who have not been screened, approved, and trained by corporate human resources professionals.

as far as I can tell, those are roblimo's words, not the words of any proposed legislation. Seems inflamatory to me (as evidenced the reaction you and I share) and smells like sensational journalism. I'd love to see a link to this in an actual proposal* or get some more info on it.

(*actually, I wouldn't like to see it in the proposal, but I would like to know if the article's claim is a fair representation of a proposed idea)

Re:Depressing issue.

[hchaos]

And this is to say what? That corporate human resources "professionals" know anything about software development? I suppose the next thing they'll believe is that programmers who learned to program in school know anything about programming.

RTFA. And, while you're at it, look up the word sarcasm.

Re:Depressing issue.

[skifreak87]

I designed one of the problem sets (homework assignments) for the intro CS course at Princeton University. The assignment is a digital signal processing one where you animate waveforms from an mp3, generate your own sound waves, and add a basic filter to a sound wave. All the sound stuff including decoding the mp3 file is done for you, you just have to manipulate the data. The assignment was intended to teach the use of objects in Java (we had students create a Wave class that had some built in capabilities to add two sound waves together, amplify/attenuate sound waves, and generate waves of a given amplitude frequency - musical notes are characterized by their frequency), and make them deal w/ arrays. FYI, here is the assignment. N.B: I'm sure I screwed up some technical sound details in there

Point of the post: I got responses ranging from I hate it to this assignment made me want to be a CS major. The people who were interested in CS/math/sciences loved it because they got to do something fun fairly simply. Those who were taking the course to fulfill a requirement or to dabble in programming hated it because it required them to deal w/ creating their own class and some math (fill an array with samples of a sin wave) and other stuff that required some thought/learning. They much preferred the assignments I hated that involved no creativity/original thought and were rather boilerplate. A lot of people (even really smart people) don't like being forced to think and much prefer memorization to critical thinking/problem solving. That's why, IMHO, many programs don't teach concepts (it disgusts me that in engineering classes the profs are "afraid" to give mathematical proofs for things b/c so many students hate them) or foundation - because too many people hate it and shy away from courses that focus on things that can't be crammed for and require understanding.

Re:Depressing issue.

[Valluvan]

The weirdest, nevertheless one true thing about the software industry, is the sheer number of stupid people in it. My personal reasoning for such a situation where a vast number of untalented rub shoulders and harass the small number of very talented (it's called Pareto principle) is in the nature of software itself. Software amplifies the speed of any process many fold that users of it do not notice the inefficiencies. Stupid people survive because the silly trash they produce is still somewhat useful for the clients. Clients tend to overlook the abysmal quality of software due to the new found efficiency in their business.

Re:Depressing issue.

[mikael]

What happened to the few really good programmers who could make amazing things happen with a basically crappy machine with barely any memory or other computing resources?

From my experience at university, I'd say that they all went into university teaching/research and/or consultancy and if they became contractors in the UK, they are unemployed.

Corporate directors are under pressure from shareholders to maintain the mandatory annual growth rate. With the large number of graduates with 2:1's and 1st class Honours, companies were instructed to do all they could to give them employment. So companies stopped looked for contractors and just wanted project managers to train up the graduates. And even then, they will only consider graduates who have already done similar work as a project. Anyone who worked as a contractor, or wasn't willing to remain for a full project lifecycle and let their skills become out of date, is being rejected. But these are the same companies who would probably downsize their project managers, once their graduates were skilled enough to become team leaders.

Re:Depressing issue.

[red floyd]

Actually, it's sarcasm. Perhaps if you RTFA, you'd see that roblimo's proposal is completely tongue in cheek.

Re:Depressing issue.

[rlanctot]

I wish my courses had been like this in College =\, it looks so INTERESTING. We spent endless hours in Data Structures class following the passing of ACK/NAK packages for various protocols. I still have the occasional flashback.

Re:Depressing issue.

[Spruce Moose]

I still have the occasional flashback.

Don't you mean retransmitted packet?

Re:Depressing issue.

[rice_burners_suck]

You've pretty much summed up one of the points I was trying to make: A lot of students, and even professors, I think, prefer the multiplication table memorization to doing any of the things I mentioned in my original post. And it's depressing not only because of the state of software nowadays, but also because most other industries suffer from the same things. I see people on a daily basis who are smart and could accomplish a lot, but they don't want to use their head. They would much rather follow directions in some step-by-step document that lays everything out for them so all they have to do is push a bunch of buttons. Really depressing.

Re:Depressing issue.

[rlanctot]

I keep NAKing them, but they seem to have malformed headers.

Re:Depressing issue.

[rice_burners_suck]

Corporate directors are under pressure from shareholders to maintain the mandatory annual growth rate.

In other words, the shareholders and managers of corporations believe:

• Corporations have a right to profit.
• The government has a duty to protect that profit.
• Corporations have a right for their profits to consistently increase.
• If a corporation's profit does not increase or actually decreases, that is the effect of a crime on the part of the consumers who purchase the product or service.

In other words, corporations have a God given right to eternal perpetually increasing profits.

Re:Depressing issue.

[morcheeba]

Yeah, you're probably right. I did read the article, and you can still be arcastic with* or without the facts. Since everything else seemed correct and backed up, I was counting on a not-too-distorted version of the facts he did present. I like roblimo's work and, as a result, I've got high expectations.

*example: "some of our industry leaders are working hand-in-hand with the European Parliament to help you get software patent legislation enacted" had a supporting sarcastic link

Re:Depressing issue.

[mikael]

In other words, corporations have a God given right to eternal perpetually increasing profits.

Investors like to see companies become 'cash cows', and become frustrated when they find out various markets are really cottage industries, or if government regulation forces them to become 'boring utilities'.

You'll find that all the people who care about quality programming/design are either working as architects or running their own companies.

Re:Depressing issue.

[marsu_k]

Getting way offtopic, and will probably be modded as such, but can you reccommend any sites on a bit more advanced DSP programming (in the x86 world)? The assignment itself looks interesting (I'm a mere student myself so it suits my skills also), but this is an issue I'd like to learn much more about.

While we are in court

[Anonymous Coward]

the Chinese, Indians, Asia, S-Americans, Africans

are busy laughing at us, innovation wont stop but western buisness might

so i for 1 welcome our new technology masters

Re:While we are in court

[Moocowsia]

You forgot Canada.

Re:While we are in court

[Anonymous Coward]

the Chinese, Indians, Asia, S-Americans, Africans

Here in S-America, Brazil is the only country innovating in software (or, at least, protecting future innovation). The rest of us were swiftly "protected from nilly-willy software developers" :(

Now in Chile, 6 months after the implementation of a FTA with the US, the BSA^H^H^Hgovernment is finally showing its claws, ready to reap from the permissive piracy (free training anyone?) operating here during the last 20 years or so.

Re:While we are in court

[bwalzer]

I had a quick look. Software patents are apparently not allowed in Canada. Patents on things that can really only be practically be done on a computer seem to be fine. I did a quick search and found a compression patent, followed by an encryption and watermarking patent. I intererpert that to mean that software patents are OK but the Canadian patent office would prefer to disgise the fact for some reason.

Patent1

Canadian Patent Search

So sorry, Canada has software patents...

The corporations take credit for government

[composer777]

sponsored innovation, much in the same way that W hides behind the troops when he is criticized for the war in Iraq, or the CEO of Walmart hides behind his employees when Walmart is criticized (i.e. "I think our associates do an oustanding job." in response to the criticism that Walmart pays oppressively low wages to their employees).

In other words, the corporate lobby that wants these patents is basically taking credit for innovation, much of which is payed for by the US government. They are using this as evidence that they deserve even more rights. There is no justification for giving corporations these kinds of rights.

Elections coming up

[pklinken]

We have the elections for the European parliament coming up this weekend..
Are there any slashdotters here that let their vote be influenced by this, and if so how ?

Re:Elections coming up

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes - this topic will steer my vote! I will vote for Green, here is why and alternatives (for Germany):

In Germany the Greens and the Liberal Party (FDP) both announced to be officially *against* Software Patents. Also the left wing (PDS) is against.

These are the choices I did take into account - in my opinion if you want to be sure and you can live with their other ideas the Greens are the safest choice!

The others do not qualify:

Situation in the SPD (Socialist party) is about 50% pro-SW-Patents and 50% against-SW-Patents. I have the feeling they both want SW-Patents (for their large industry lobby) but likewise not the consequences of them. Since they cannot make their mind up, I need to put by vote otherwise.

For the CDU/CSU (Conservative party) the situtation is even worse, about 70% pro-SW-Patents and 30% against. Most of their MEPs are not well informed and tend to believe the party line (which seems to be mostly dictated by a MEP Wuermling - a strong supporter of Software Patents).

Wuermling also called the EU parliament 'uninformed and confused' (in which he is also a memeber) and praised the councils version of the directive loudly - in my eyes not someone you would want to see as qualified member of the EU parliament.

Re:Elections coming up

[pklinken]

This should definitely be modded up since this is what the thread asks for (poor AC)

Re:Elections coming up

[Anonymous Coward]

I have already voted one that opposed the software patents...I hope shell be elected :)

Re:Elections coming up

[pklinken]

Where do you live that voting has started already ? Voting starts tommorow here in the Netherlands and i thought we were early

Re:Elections coming up

[Anonymous Coward]

In Sweden voting at post offices started May 26

Re:Elections coming up

[TerminalSpin]

Here in the UK, the UKIP (UK Independence Party) seem to have picked up a lot of of support over this issue. See this open letter from Alan Cox http://www.linux.org.uk/open.l.html

Re:Elections coming up

[leomekenkamp]

About 2 years ago I send an email to Erik Meijer, number 1 on the list for the SP (Socialistische Partij), which stated (amongst others) that I would never vote for the SP, but I had some worries and would like to know what he thought about these worries. I got a polite answer and he shared my worries and told me what he was doing about it. He even sent me updates.

Erik Meijer has consequently voted against s/w patents. The SP also makes the most fuss about 'zakkenvullerij' (stuffing one's pockets) like for instance EU parliament members who receive the maximum price for an airplane ticket, while they travel on the cheapest tickets available.

Normally I vote D66 (in the political middle, 'intellectual' party). Minister Bronkhorst (from the D66 ironically) recently voted 'yes' on dropping all restriction amendements on s/w patentablility, basically giving the green light for patenting about everything. Given the undemocratic behaviour of the current european lawmaking process, combined with the ridiculous idea of patenting s/w, I will today do what I would have never thought: I will vote SP.

Re:Elections coming up

[marsu_k]

Yes, and my decision was based solely on this issue (well, this and privacy issues, I don't to want to be placed into a list of suspected terrorists if I fly somewhere and refuse to eat meat... then again, I'm probably already on the list).

Since you really can't count on a single person to support all of your interests, and since political parties have much more influence in the parliament than individuals, I had to pick something to base my vote on. And I really really don't want a patent system similiar to the US in the EU, if there's something I can do about it I will. Mind you, the party also mattered, but it wasn't my top priority, it might as well have been Greens (it was Socialists this time).

Re:Elections coming up

[RogerWilco]

Yes, I already have voted this morning (in the Netherlands the voting is today) and I did let my vote be decided on the Software Patent issue.
And I did vote against Software patents. (although there were some other issues where I also agree with the local green party)

Re:Elections coming up

[juhaz]

You are early.

But that's the "main" voting, pre-election was everywhere last week, AFAIK.

Re:Elections coming up

[juhaz]

Yes, this is absolutely the single most important thing in making the decision.

As the others have noted, Greens are unique in that they have unified stance on this matter with good guys across whole Europe. And quite a few other things seem to be pretty nice in that direction.

Unfortunately, they're Greens. I can't stand their pseudo-environmental knee-jerk reaction against nuclear power and biotechnology, that has nothing to do with rational thought of real environmental issues and more with feelings. Looks like Left Alliance has to do as a compromise, not that there aren't problems in their views as well..

No single MEP seems to fit, parties even less so.

If Europe allows software patents...

[Gay Nigger]

There's no telling how bad an effect this could have on Free Software. With Microsoft already trying to crush innovation in Linux over here in the states, I can see this new move towards more patent laws as only extending their grip to Free Europe. Hopefully, the people of Europe are more aware of what their government is doing than we are, and consequently will be writing their legislatures in larger numbers than the small IP-aware group that resides in the US.

It's a shame to see that this is almost definitely going to happen. With the abundance of bogus patents already granted in the US, it's only a matter of time before people start seeing obvious and old ideas being patented by corporations that exist solely to sue others into submission and profit from the legal entanglements while the lawyers are busy sorting everything out. I can't believe that Europeans would be so dumb as to bring this upon themselves, and can only conclude that the US is strongly pressuring them to come around to their point of view vis-a-vis intellectual "property".

Who's in the US pressuring Europe into this, why are they doing this, and how can we stop them?

Re:If Europe allows software patents...

[LeftOfCentre]

The European Patent Office has been granting stupid software patents for years, even though they'll remain impossible to enforce pending the new legislation. For example, see some of Ericsson's patents here.

As you would expect, the average European is just as clueless about software patents as the average American. I wish this was not true but it is. It's possible that there's a higher awareness within the political parties, but not necessarily in favour of the free software position. At least the European greens in the parliament seem to have some clue.

Regards,

/ A EUropean who will take this opportunity to help vote in representatives this weekend with a favourable view on this matter.

Re:If Europe allows software patents...

[john_anderson_ii]

Here is a place to start.

Re:If Europe allows software patents...

[John Courtland]

I wonder if some day people are going to get so fed up with this shit that they just do whatever the fuck they want because their contempt for the law has grown magnitudes beyond their respect for it. I'd be all for supporting a person/orginazation that would effectively show a strong dissonance (like, blatantly disobeying a software patent and disregarding the court orders). In fact, that would be an interesting underground orginization to form, just a bunch of smart software developers pumping out code that completely breaches patents left and right...

Re:If Europe allows software patents...

[juhaz]

That can't hurt, but it won't really help either.

The real place to start is this weekend at voting booth.

Excuse me?

[fiannaFailMan]

willy-nilly software development by individuals who have not been screened, approved, and trained by corporate human resources professionals

When did Bill Gates ever get "screened, approved, and trained by corporate human resources professionals ?"

Re:Excuse me?

[ScrewMaster]

When did Bill Gates ever get "screened, approved, and trained by corporate human resources professionals ?"

I don't know, but if he was, it would explain a lot.

Re:Excuse me?

[Anonymous Coward]

Um... If software patents would rid us of Microsoft's products, I think I'd re-evaluate my opinion on them.

Eu advice to U.S

[Anonymous Coward]

STFU and keep your nose out of our buisness

regards

Re:Eu advice to U.S

[Oligonicella]

Right after you act the same, chum.

Heh...

[Run4yourlives]

Free software needs to win the software war as soon as possible.

followed by

In memory of Ronald Wilson Reagan. We will never forget you.

Am I the only one who sees the irony here?

Re:Heh...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's pretty important never to forget Hitler either. The irony may not be quite what you think. The poster never claimed to LIKE Reagan, eh?

Re:Heh...

[jd]

They didn't mention forgiving the guy... :)

(Besides, it'll be hard to forget him, no matter how hard we try.)

Back to the issue at hand...

Software/Maths patents cannot co-exist with Free Software. Ether one will survive and the other will die, or both will destroy each other in the fight.

Patents of any kind no longer serve the purpose of protecting investment, as you can patent ideas that you have no intent of ever turning into anything real. So-called "Defensive" patents. With the minimal screening, you don't need to provide any evidence the idea would even work. Just front up the cash and take your turn in line.

This kills innovation, for two reasons. First, nobody else has any incentive to actually build the damn thing (and risk being sued to oblivion). Second, the patent-holder (if the patent is any good) can just wait until someone pays them royalties to implement the idea.

In short, unless a LOT of money is at stake (as in the pharmacutical industry), it's infinitely cheaper to collect as many patents as possible - like stamps or coins - on the off-chance someone else will eventually think the idea valuable enough to buy.

Look at the patent serial numbers, and compare that with the number of items you can think of that are sufficiently distinct and unique to warrant a patent for the idea.

I'm going to guess that the number of patents issued is maybe six to seven orders of magnitude greater than the number of inventions in existance.

Now throw in software and algorithm patents, where any process that can be formally described can be patented. In fact, not all descriptions are that formal. They just have to be descriptive enough to pass muster.

Software development on any scale will simply die. There won't be any point to it, any more. It'll either be done (and patented), or theorised (and patented anyway). Either way, smaller companies and garage developers won't have a snowball's chance in hell of surviving. Any more than garage developers and cottage industries have survived in the physical world.

It's not because they can't compete, or produce the work. It's because the initial costs involved are just too high. The hurdles are too great. The days when you could go into the shed and come out with a multi-million dollar idea (eg: Hewlett-Packard, Jobs & Wosnik, etc) are over. Not because - as Apple once claimed - it's all been done. No. It's because the right to invent has been killed, in favour of a right to stifle, plus the right to profit off marketroid daydreams.

Patents for hypertext? Patents for one-click purchases? Patents for list processing? Is this what civilization has come to?

Yeah, I know, I sound cynical. I probably am. I'm tired of the fiction we call the patent system. I'm tired of companies profiteering from obviously bogus patent and IP claims. These days, you don't invest money in the stock market, you invest it in the patent office!

The system assumes people will play nice. Well, they don't. It's time to retire a system that has been falling apart for decades, and replace it. I suggest using the toss of a coin. For a start, coins are cheaper. They'll also make the correct decision half the time. A much better score than what we have right now.

Re:Heh...

[Art Tatum]

Am I the only one who sees the irony here?

Explain.

Re:Heh...

[MeanSolutions]

Oh well, if we are to have patents in EU, why not adopt the Japanese style of patent management. You get your patent if deemed sufficiently unique (might be a tricky one considering the EPO track record of checking prior art) but then, and here-in lies the beauty, you have to demonstrate that you are using the patent within six month of it being issued or you lose it and it goes into the Public Domain. After two years, it automatically becomes Public Domain.

Now that is a system that I think most people could live with. It should also ensure that a patent will actually be USED as otherwise is becomes PD after just six months.

Now, if only the USPTO could be cajoled into adopting the same system...

Re:Heh...

[haruchai]

Well, I think that the time restrictions are too onerous but this is how the patent systems worldwide
should be.
Also, there may need to be some adjustment of the time permitted depending on how difficult the idea was/is to develop or demonstrate.
But, can you imagine the outcry this would cause in the US if someone were bold enough to attempt this?

Re:Heh...

[MeanSolutions]

Perhaps a patent could be allowed to run for up to four years if it was deemed to have taken serious effort to develop, and automatically lapse it once R&D costs are covered?

I like the 6 months / 2 years approach as the system is less likely to be abused by companies patenting anything and everything they can think of, even if there is demonstrateably tons of prior art (One click shopping and double clicking with mouse for example). It also provides ample time to recoup R&D costs, if you have not made your money back in two years (remember that you research things, and when you have the idea in place, you patent it, so you should be able to have prototype etc in place by the time patent is granted) the idea was lousy or just simply wrong for the market.

The outcry in US would be loud enough to hear across the Atlantic if anyone pushed this idea through in the USPTO. Imagine all them cashcow patents that has been in place for about 6-7 years, with 13-14 years left to run that suddenly expired and became PD. Or all new patent applications that automatically lapse after six months because the company that applied for them never intended to use them at all, just collect royalties on them for 20 years.. (IIRC patents run for 20 years in the US, yes?) /A

this whole thing is interesting, really

[HBI]

Things don't happen in a vacuum. US software corporations are lobbying intensely for software patents. The idea is that if they can patent software concepts, they can provide a reliable and consistent revenue stream.

This has to be the most obvious manifestation to date of the threat that OSS presents to the traditional software vendors, led by Microsoft. I doubt they would be bothering to do this against corporate competition. All corporations labor under the same constraints. They have to pay people to do the work. OSS breaks the rules in a significant way, and is disruptive to traditional proprietary software houses. They don't have any value-add anymore.

Patents are primarily defensive in nature in any event. Most attempts to use them offensively to crush competing technologies, or shake down entire industries, eventually fail.

I don't understand exactly what the current Administration thinks it is doing trying to pressure the EU to adopt software patents. It is not like the revenue stream is going to land in Europe. What goal or self-interest is fulfilled by adopting software patents in the EU? (beside the obvious cash payoff previously documented to the Irish Presidency) How are jobs created in Europe? How does this benefit Europeans of any nation?

I wonder what kind of arm-twisting by the US is going on in the mythical smoke-filled room (where all such decisions are being made).

Re:this whole thing is interesting, really

[thisissilly]

Step 1: Get the EU to adopt software patents.
Step 2: Squash open source via patent lawsuits.
Step 3: Sell more U.S. [e.g., Microsoft] software in the EU.
Step 4: Profit! (From Microsoft campaign "donations".)

Re:this whole thing is interesting, really

[HBI]

I'm really only familiar with politics in England, out of all the EU. My understanding is that MPs can't accept campaign contributions, the campaigns are paid for out of government funds.

Willing to be corrected on this one - some Brit journalist at Lehigh back a couple years ago told me this.

It is probably too big of an assumption to assume that this is the case elsewhere in the EU, but my perception of politics in Europe is that the politicians can't accept contributions and soft money like they can here.

Re:this whole thing is interesting, really

[Anonymous Coward]

"and is disruptive to traditional proprietary software houses. They don't have any value-add anymore."

But software houses can and do provide value add by taking open source software, improving it, tailoring it, and repackaging it. Many large companies (IBM, Novell, etc) seem to be doing this. It would seem that Microsoft (having benefited from the lack of patents initially, and from the BSD TCP/IP stack) that seems to want to close things off to new competition. This is the typical stance of a would-be monopolist.

Re:this whole thing is interesting, really

[Ryan Hemage]

It's the reverse, in fact: all campaigns are paid for by contributions by members and supportors of the party, though there are caps on how much you can spend at the constituency and national level (the latter cap was introduced only a few years ago). The opposition parties do receive public funds (known as Short money) but it's only to fund offices (e.g., the shadow cabinet) -- it's forbidden to use it for campaigning purposes.

Re:this whole thing is interesting, really

[HBI]

Thanks for the clarification: the image presented over here is that politics in Great Britain are immune to the money pressures here.

Yes.

[Serious Simon]

I'm voting for a person who has shown clear opposition to software patents.

Re:Yes.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hell yeah, go vote for good ole Santa, and don't forget the Tooth Fairy.

Re:Yes.

[Anonymous Coward]

In France, politicians say: we will lower taxes and unemployment. Average Joe say: shut up, I wanna watch TV.
And no one knows what a 'pay tent' is!?! This whole patent story has no connection to everyday life, and no one seems to understand or even care about the problems that could come from it.

Re:Yes.

[killbill!]

It is very sad that in the countries I've heard about (France and Germany: I am French but happen to be living in Germany atm), only two parties (the Liberals and the Greens) have a solid European platform.
Those are not mainstream as they usually hover between 5 and 10% of the vote. The larger Socialist and Conservative Parties never seriously dealt with Europe in their campaign - it was rather all about bashing the other party on a strictly national basis. No wonder voter turnout is going to be dismal once again :(


I originally intended to vote for the (German) Liberal Party. Out of habit maybe, since I usually vote for its French sister party, the French Democratic Union (UDF).
Then I saw their voting record on the software patent issue. Screw them, I'm going with the Greens this time.

A previous poster was modded down as offtopic for this, but offtopic it sure was not. Indeed, the Greens are the only party that has consistently opposed any kind of software patents on a European basis. Besides, by voting for the Greens because of software patents, you are also rewarding one of the very few parties that actually care about Europe.

Come to think of it, anyone know what happened to the voting records on the FFII website (http://www.ffii.org.uk/votes/swpat/)?
The URL now returns 404 Errors at this very crucial time!

Re:Yes.

[Teddyman]

I even voted for a person whose whole party is opposed to software patents, so even if my candidate won't get elected, my vote could help somebody else from the same party. (The D'Hondt method is used to determine vote results here.)

Re:Yes.

[thygrrr]

Voting for the Greens, as they also have a good clue when it comes to privacy.

Never trust the FDP, the party of the "better earning" class ... they ere incredibly dangerous and it strikes me as odd that they suddenly (?) oppose software patents.

Maybe they are planning to backstab by 'changing' their mindsets on the very day of the decision.

Both major parties are clumsy and clueless. Very dangerous and reckless of The People to grant them so much power.

Re:Yes.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm voting for the one with the biggest tits

Re:Yes.

[Anonymous Coward]

Vote for Greens and the trend will continue ...

What trend ?

http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/pdf/EU_vs_USA_Engl is h.pdf

Re:Yes.

[jawtheshark]

Luxembourg here... As from I get it (from ffii.org) my country is too much in favour for software patents. Urks... even the socialists! Fuck, I thought that the socialists were supposed to care about people and not corporations.

Guess, I'll have to vote green.... :-/

Re:Yes.

[kraut]

The trouble with the Liberal Party (FDP) in Germany is that while they are somewhat liberal on economics (actually, more corporatist these days), they are mostly socially conservative.

The trouble with the Greens is that they're the other way around.

Oh for a party that's liberal economically and socially - i.e. doesn't want to fuck with my money, and doesn't want to fuck with my life!

Re:Yes.

[AllUsernamesAreGone]

Fuck, I thought that the socialists were supposed to care about people and not corporations.

Theoretically they still do, but in many cases they either don't actually understand the issue (the patent system is complex, buried in legal mumbo-gumbo and a long way down the list of the list of things Normal People - and therefore MEPs - are interested in) or they have been scared into the "some directive is better than nothing" position without realising that in this case "some directive" in any of its current forms is far, far worse than nothing at all.

Re:Yes.

[jawtheshark]

Well, I usually vote socialist. Making me a pinko-communist-bastard on slashdot. This time I'll vote green, making me a tree-hugger.

*sigh* Dunno which one is better ;-) But you're right, they can't understand the problems that patents on software will induce because most people do not understand software is something way different that a "manufacturable product".

Re:Yes.

[o'reor]

http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/pdf/EU_vs_USA_Englis h.pdf

Loads of horseshit in there, sounds like a report coming from a neocon think tank.

"Better to be poor in a rich country than in a poor one" ? OK, take the example of health care : 15% of the US population has no access to health care. Meanwhile, in a number of european countries, universal health care is provided to the poorest fringe of population, although those states are reportedly "poorer" than the US. And they can afford it because the health industry is under control : pharmaceutical industries are not spending obscene amounts of money in advertising, for instance, and public hospitals are not under pressure to generate a 15% ROI. Mind you, I'll choose the latter option over the former any time.

Obviously, Corporate America has to stop this

[Brad Cossette]

You have to expect a large amount of corporate (well, American corporate) and even gov't FUD over this. Corporations want a sure thing - secure investments and market control. Patents in every form are a lock (to some degree) on money and a preventative measure on competition.

I personally wouldn't mind software patents if they were truly fundamental breakthroughs or such (RSA cryptography comes to mind), but with Microsoft patenting "To Do Lists" the EU should be really concerned over what kind of silliness is going to be submitted as a software patent.

For that matter, if the EU was to adopt software patents, what % of those patents would be American?

Should the EU choose not to adopt the software patent idea, we'll see the EU become the hotbed of software creativity for the next 20 years. That's something that'll rankle America, but will it bother the U.S. enough to suffer the pain of changing the patent law?

Re:Obviously, Corporate America has to stop this

[Anonymous Coward]

For that matter, if the EU was to adopt software patents, what % of those patents would be American?

About 65%... I don't really need to comment beyond that, but let me just say it sickens me how willing my "fellow europeans" are to sell me down the river.

Re:Obviously, Corporate America has to stop this

[Alsee]

I personally wouldn't mind software patents if they were truly fundamental breakthroughs or such (RSA cryptography comes to mind)

Chuckle. Take a look at the original RSA patent. They don't even get to the RSA encryptin until the SEVENTH claim. Claim one (the root of the patent) is on the very idea of public key cryptography.

Even once you do get down to claim 7, it's still a patent on the "invention" of doing math. Groan.

-

Re:Obviously, Corporate America has to stop this

[Anonymous Coward]

That figure is not quite right: American and Japanese companies taken together hold 65% of currently-illegitimate EU software patents. Either way, it's still approx 2/3rds of control going off outside the EU.

Re:Obviously, Corporate America has to stop this

[Anonymous Coward]

"Should the EU choose not to adopt the software patent idea, we'll see the EU become the hotbed of software creativity for the next 20 years. That's something that'll rankle America"

Not nearly so much as it'll rankle Europe when the department of homeland insecurity (with help from US business leaders) finds "evidence" that all that creative software development is funding terrorism. It'll never come to that, though. There isn't an MEP out there with the spine to tell the Americans where to stuff their silly patents. They all know how international politics is played; you'll do what the US tells you to, or you'll get "regime change".

Enjoy your megacorp domintated future, suckers...

Re:Obviously, Corporate America has to stop this

[ttsalo]

They all know how international politics is played; you'll do what the US tells you to, or you'll get "regime change".

Get real, we're talking about the western world here, not the third world. Still remember Bush's steel tariffs? Remember how EU gave him an ultimatum to get rid of them? And how he dropped them just days before the EU counter-tariffs were to take effect? And the absence of US CVBGs off the EU coasts?

--

Re:Obviously, Corporate America has to stop this

[Deternal]

To be fair the steel tariffs was something the democrats forced on the administration - not really something they liked.

Politics isn't a nice business and this administration has made enough stupid mistakes - so putting the steel tariffs on them too isn't really nice :)

Btw I'm a EU citizen - just for the sake of it.

Re:Obviously, Corporate America has to stop this

[Anonymous Coward]

Also bear in mind that RSA had already been invented by GCHQ (which for obvious reasons did not reveal this information).

Re:Obviously, Corporate America has to stop this

[Anonymous Coward]

"To be fair the steel tariffs was something the democrats forced on the administration"

Plenty of democrats argued against them, plenty of Republicans for them.

The thing that ended the tarrifs was not potential EU action but lobbying by users of steel that complained that steel prices had gone up and production of steel parts was moving abroad and was likely to cost more jobs than the tarrifs would save.

Re:Obviously, Corporate America has to stop this

[JuggleGeek]

Even once you do get down to claim 7, it's still a patent on the "invention" of doing math. Groan.

Worse, the basis of RSA encryption is the difficulty of solving a math problem (factoring) that mathmeticians have studied for years. The inventors certainly had an advantage, in that lots of study on how to factor had already been done. Yet, when they do similar work, they expect that no one else will be allowed to use the knowledge they developed. Seems a bit hypocritical, to me.

Slowing Down = Good for Open Source

[artlu]

I think patents in the U.S. slow down the product development process to some extent. By slowing down the process, Open Source competition can grow, and allow for software "alternatives" to arrive on the market first. The other problem with software, which is stated in the article, is that most new software is based off of previous software and this can lead to stunted growth of otherwise good applications.

Also, the fact that patents cost money can lead some software projects to open source licensing directly in order to ensure protection. I see this as good for the open source community, but bad for the software industry. Although, maybe I am misunderstanding the article.

On a side note, if you like the stock market/day trading/momentum trading/swing trading, I have built a website which showcases my paper trades. Everything is free of course, so please check it out - GroupShares.com

Thanks,
Aj

Re:Slowing Down = Good for Open Source

[MoonBuggy]

Your point is good, but unfortunately the broadness of most software patents means that if there is an OSS 'alternative' to a proprietary program, it will probably infringe on that patent and risk being crushed by a team of elite ninja lawyers.

Re:Slowing Down = Good for Open Source

[Mr. Sketch]

By slowing down the process, Open Source competition can grow, and allow for software "alternatives" to arrive on the market first

Until you infringe on one of their patents...

Re:Slowing Down = Good for Open Source

[artlu]

Yes, but if your program is good enough to be squished by corporate lawyers, you know a job offer will await you somewhere in the world :).

Re:Slowing Down = Good for Open Source

[Anonymous Coward]

I do not aspire to being a serf to a neofeudal lord and master waving an MBA. I want to program first and foremost. Making money is secondary. If corporate lawyers squish my program, I'd rather blow their heads off than take up that job offer.

Re:Slowing Down = Good for Open Source

[Anonymous Coward]

Not until, when... no, even that's too much future tense.

I'm quite sure you infringe on someones patent with "hello world", and a gigantic amount of them with compiler that can actually make that work.

Because, you know, HR people can REALLY pick em.

[lifebouy]

I have never, ever met an HR person who I would hire after seeing them in action. An anectote about a monkey and a football come to mind.

Open Source development, however, is PEER reviewed. The bullsh*t walks, in any project of a substantial size and momentum to produce, say, an office suite. Someones screws up enough times and they get kicked from the project. Peers have the actual knowledge to say, this guys work is crap. HR can say, well he showed up in a clean suit with a good haircut and had a great handshake. Thats real nice, but Ill take the open source software anyday.

Half the reason proprietary software sucks, aside from not being free, is that its written by the guy with the best handshake, or whatever cosmetic thing the HR weenie was looking for that day. Never trust a bureaucrat HR rep to make a decision that a peer could make better.

There is only one way to deal with software patent

[ShatteredDream]

And that is to get the government and private industry so hooked on open source software that software patents would wreck the economy. The fastest way for the public to begin to realize that this is a terrible legal system is to make it hit home.

But then open source developers often just don't get it either. OpenOffice for example doesn't even have a word count feature nor the ability to print multiple slides on the same page. These are two features that are absolutely critical in an academic environment for students. With academia firmly against proprietary software giants, we can use universities as a weapon against them.

We really need for a group like Knoppix to make a LiveCD with the ability to do a very clean, intelligent install to the hard drive. LiveCDs are the way to go for installations. The user can play around with them all they want and then ideally, just run an installer to copy it to the hard drive and configure the bootloader.

Right now we have about 1.5-2 years before the next version of Windows comes out. Now is the time for the major projects to conduct user surveys to find out what is missing, add the features and get the product out the door. The fastest way to take down Microsoft, the biggest threat on patents, is to make them stop growing their profits. Since the company makes a lot of its payments from stock, if we can stop them from growing, maybe even cause them to actually have slight negative growth, it would unbalance their payment system which would cause them to have to burn through more cash.

And as an aside, ironically to those who are thinking G-ddamn he is a socialist.... I'm voting libertarian in 2004.

Makes me wonder

[bigattichouse]

If there will come a day when, to get a job, you'll have to create and patent some sort of platform.. so that you are the only person who can leggaly create software using that platform

Re:Makes me wonder

[kusanagi374]

If there will come a day when, to get a job, you'll have to create and patent some sort of platform.. so that you are the only person who can leggaly create software using that platform

And be smashed by all those juggernauts that own the most adopted platforms. More like we will all have to pay big companies large sums to create software for those platforms, like people already do when creating software for game consoles.

U.S. advice to E.U.

[Anonymous Coward]

We'll put our nose where we like, when we like, and you'll say "Thank You, Master." Or else.

Re:U.S. advice to E.U.

[Anonymous Coward]

Or else, what?

Ohh yeah, you and and what army?

Re:There is only one way to deal with software pat

[Anonymous Coward]

OpenOffice.org does have a word count feature, click on File > Properties and then look under the Statistics tab.

Re:Because, you know, HR people can REALLY pick em

[ScrewMaster]

I find your comments interesting. I've been developing data acquisition and process control software for twenty-five years in a number of fields and industries, and never was able to land a job by going through Human Resources, or "Personnel" as they used to call it. I'm unfortunately a square peg, as far as HR is concerned. Lots of experience but no degree, and as I was an independent developer for 18 years I had no convenient "salary history" to show. My current full-time position I got because the director of software engineering did all the interviewing himself, not trusting anyone else to make such an important decision, and was more concerned about my accomplishments and my technical capabilities than my grip. Too bad more managers aren't like him.

I agree with you about the monkey and the football.

Re:Because, you know, HR people can REALLY pick em

[Anonymous Coward]

Could you tell me the monkey and football anecdote? It may be common where you are, but I've never heard it.

Election swpat coverage

[Holger Blasum]

Software patents party trends, candidate statements and voting behavior for many European countries (it's a wiki, add your country if you feel it's missing ;)

restated

[Anonymous Coward]

This has to be the most obvious manifestation to date of the threat that corperations present to citizens of this country. My government is supposed to represent me; not faceless multinational coperations that are trying top protect thier revenue stream.

My governemt should have quickly responded that competition drives down prices providing value for thier constiuents. Providing patent protection for software would do nothing but allow corperations to shake them down.

But then again, we are all well aware of the continuing shift from having a "governement for the people" to a "government for the corperation".

Re:There is only one way to deal with software pat

[Anonymous Coward]

RTFM

I hate "Behavioral" interviews

[BrianMarshall]

You know, those interviews where most of it is based on recalling how you handled some particular sort of situation in the past.

I find it extremely difficult to recall particular past instances, whereas I have no difficulty talking about how I would handle a hypothetical situation.

My mind is deeply into classes; instances are transitory things that are hardly worth remembering.

Re:I hate "Behavioral" interviews

[cammoblammo]

Speaking as someone trained in interviewing techniques, there are two main reasons for asking these types of questions.

First, past behaviour is the best predictor of future behaviour. Now I don't know how empirically this principle has been tested, but it seems to be right. If someone shot up the lunch room in his last job, there's a reasonable possibility he may act a little irrationally in this one.

Second, it's a lot easier to give the 'right answer' to a hypothetical question. As an interviewer, I want to know how you are going act in a given situation. Of course, it's a,ot easier to colour the truth a little in those cases. You'll give the answer you think I want to hear, not the real one. More to the point, you'll probably even think it's true. It's sounds the most rational answer at the time, and it seems the most sensible. In the heat of the situation, though, your personality will shine through, not the one you were trying to sell the interviewer.

Havng said all of that, though, I've also been on the receiving end of this type of interviewing, and you can never think of a good answer until after the interview. Just bear in mind that everyone else in the the line has to go through the same set of questions as you do.

Finally, my experience is that managers still go on gut instinct and don't listen to a word you say. So try to give the right answers, sure. Just remember that it's the manager making the decision, not the HR bunny.

Game theory?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm no expert on game theory but my understanding is that the
barriers/rewards to investing in R&D can be modeled with game theory.
Availability of patents encourage more players to invest because if they
are successful (and produce innovation before their competitors), their
investment will be protected by patents.

The article mentions that the R&D investment is noticeably less that R&D
in other industries. I imagine this change to the game may alter the
outcomes.

Does anyone know of research done on software patents using game theory?

Re:Game theory?

[Holger Blasum]

Innovation that uses components and puts together many ideas and standards is on the other hand, game-theoretically hassled by patents.

E.g. Robert Hunt, Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank, sees the the market equilibrium to be bad for software when patents come into play (he also quotes model calculations).

Also note that the US did not have software patents during the 70s/80s when many of today's big players grew up. Nor does India with its dynamic industry have software patents.

Software patents are good.

[xyote]

I mean they're preventing me from implementing this new algorithm, RCU for preemptive user threads. IBM has way too many defensive patents in that area. It gives me an excuse for not doing it and anyway, we have too many algorithms already.

Re:Jury's Out -

[Anonymous Coward]

Irelands presidency of the EU council make the current 'pro-patent' EU council directive happen!!

Most large US companies has their EU site in Ireland, because of cheap taxes and the Irish government is doing most anything to keep them happy. I tend to belive the ministers would sell their own daugthers and grandmothers to gene laboraties to keep these companies on their island. ;-)

On a side note: This is not about socialists - it is about freedom, freedom to work, to code, to write unhindered by oppressing laws and regulations. The lines of people against SW-Patents stems from all parties, from the right to the left.

Inform yourself, then GO TO THE BALLOT and make others go too!!!

EU: http://kwiki.ffii.org/?ElectPart0405En

UK: http://kwiki.ffii.org/?ElectUkPart0405En

"human resources professionals" my a$$

[Anonymous Coward]

"to suffer from willy-nilly software development by individuals who have not been screened, approved, and trained by corporate human resources professionals."

Oh FFS, what do "corporate human resources professionals" know about software development?

It is ironic that these "human resources professionals" usually have ZERO knowledge on the applicants they screen, yet they are the ones who wield power on whether your resume gets passed on to the relevant people.

Re:"human resources professionals" my a$$

[BravoFourEcho]

I think you missed the inherent tag on that line....

Re:European elections - Vote Green!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is _not_ OFF TOPIC! :-)

Re:There is only one way to deal with software pat

[Anonymous Coward]

hardly good UI design, though, is it? "Word count" would make sense as a "Tools" menu option. Though maybe they don't want to draw attention to it as it sucks so much relative to Word Perfect's (comparing to microsoft word is silly... it's the dregs of wordprocessordom). Lawyers are STILL using Word Perfect simply because it's word count works properly...

Posting from my Math Class...

[dcollins]

... as I give a test to my students. You need to stop posting these threads on Wednesday night when I generally don't have time to read them. (Like the infinite twin primes proof from two weeks ago.)

Thank you for your consideration. :)

Re:Posting from my Math Class...

[advocate_one]

"You need to stop posting these threads on Wednesday night when I generally don't have time to read them. (Like the infinite twin primes proof from two weeks ago.)"

Then you won't have enjoyed them posting the Riemann Hypothesis proof article then ;)

it's been painfully obvious for a few years

[ites]

that there is a firm and long-term strategy in place by certain groups to find ways of outlawing the act of writing code for public consumption without a license. the end goal being simply to create or perpetuate existing monopolies by the creation of artificial barriers to entry into what has become an incredibly open market.

i think the first real attempt (or mockup) was certification of code which found its extreme in palladium. This principally technical solution has since been abandoned.

the current wave is based around so-called intellectual property rights. the term is a joke, but has many proponents, from the media industries through to the software business. you do not own that idea, it belongs to someone already. the space in your head has a 75-year lease.

this will also fail imho. it is - like palladium - too ludicrous a proposition and fails the basic darwin test: any society that allows its common technological culture to be partitioned into 'property' will suffer competitive disadvantage and eventually either change or die.

i expect the next phases to be based on security, but only after the current market leader is long dead and gone, its laughably insecure products being replaced with "professional" ones from other, older players.

who will, i think, be in the fore-front of the lobby to license software programming.

i've been programming for 20 years but i am very sure that my children will not be allowed to do this freely, any more than i can distill liquor and sell it to my neighbours.

software is just too fundamental, too valuable to be left in the hands of the common people.

Re:it's been painfully obvious for a few years

[Alsee]

certification of code which found its extreme in palladium. This principally technical solution has since been abandoned.

Your misunderstand Palladium, it's not about code certification at all. Nor has it been abandoned.

The very reason Trusted Computing (Palladium) is so dangerous is because it uses the tried and true tactic of Embrace and Extend (and Exterminate). All software will run on a Trusted machine without any certification at all (embrace).

What Trusted Computing really does (extends) it allow the creation of new software and new files and new that will not work except on a Trusted Computer. Not only that, but the new software and new files and new websites will only work if you "voluntarily" configure the rest of your computer precisely the way someone else demands. For example software will only install and files will only play if your computer is configured to enforce DRM against you. Websites will refuse to display (returning an error message) if you have a pop-up blocker installed. Much like many websites already return error messages if you have Javascript off or cookies off.

Many (most?) laptops are already shipping with Trust chips installed by defalt, and the first Desktops with Trust chips have begun shipping. One major manufacturer has already announded that all new PCs they make will come with a Trust chip. The expectation is that within a year ALL new PCs will ship with a Trust chip on the motherboard.

They have been careful to ensure that there is NEVER any reason not to get a computer with a Trust chip. It would be as pointless as demanding a computer without speakers. You might as well take the default model with speakers attached, it can do everything a speakerless computer could do. You could just pretend the speakers aren't there.

So the plan is that over the next 4 years or so, everyone who goes through the routine process of replacing their obsolete machines will simply be handed a Trusted machine. Every machine available will be a Trusted machine. You wind up with 90-odd percent of all home PC's replaced with Trusted machines.

The scary part - the Exterminate phase - is that they want ISP's to install new Trusted routers. Slashdot already did a story on these routers and completely missed the fact that these are Trusted routers. The Slashdot headline was Cisco Working to Block Viruses at the Router. But they don't actually block viruses. What they actually do is refuse to give you internet access at all unless you have a Trusted Computer AND you are running (or not running) exactly the software your ISP mandates you must run (like a specific and up-to-date virus scanner and firewall). When 90-odd percent of people have a Trusted Machine then ISP's *can* fairly painlessly install these routers and make Trusted Computing and software compliance a part of their Terms of Service. The president's cybersecurity advisor has called on ISP's to do exactly that at a Washington computer convention. All in the name of fighting viruses and protecting the national information infrastructure of course.

If you refuse to buy a Trusted Machine, or if you refuse to configure it as someone else mandates, or if you refuse to run the mandated software, then it will be impossible to install any of the new Trusted software and impossible to use any of the new Trusted files and impossible to access any of the new Trusted websites, and if you refuse to submit you may ultimately be denied any internet access at all.

It's an insidious plan that can work - that WILL work - unless there is a massive public backlash against it.

The problem is that most people don't know and don't care. They just want the damn computer to work. People will get free music downloads or free video downloads or music/movie disks free with a box of cereal or a Happy Meal. And that free stuff will only work on a Trusted machine. If they try to use

Re:it's been painfully obvious for a few years

[smoker2]

i've been programming for 20 years but i am very sure that my children will not be allowed to do this freely, any more than i can distill liquor and sell it to my neighbours.
And that is exactly why I started to learn programming, way back when !
I remember reading a sci-fi book as a kid about a world where there were terminals on street corners and all financial transactions and requests for knowledge had to be processed thru these (govt. controlled) devices. Then there were the "hackers" who could run their own system over the top of the official channels. I made my mind up there and then which side I was on.
So none of what has being going on in the computing/patent/ip field has been much of a surprise to me. "They" can patent as much as they like, it won't stop me using and distributing my software , and helping others to f*ck the system. I don't mean that I write viruses or break into other peoples (computer)systems, but when push comes to shove, I might need those hacking skills one day.

Re:it's been painfully obvious for a few years

[TPFH]

Well, going out and buying a CD is what $20 if the price fixing rate continues as it has. Heck, it is what I pay for import music which constitutes a significan portion of my music. Anyway, logically it doesn't make sense to pay $1000-$500 dollars just to listen to free music. People will do it anyway but something I wanted to point out.

I wonder if there will still be some local ISPs that don't force their customers to "upgrade." There are still a few ISPs out ther that provide shell accounts. I pay more for it but I use a local ISP to get DSL. Would there be an underground internet with the old routers?

How often are backbone internet routers replaced?
Maybe it would be a series of micronets. Maybe there will be a wifi net. And ten years from now I'll probably still have the computers I'm using now around. Probably be bigger in high tech areas like the bay area and Portland.

But it is a chilling senario.

The answer will probably be shut up and eat your happy meal.

Re:it's been painfully obvious for a few years

[Alsee]

An ISP really only needs to instal a single authentication computer at certain points to control all customers hanging below it on that branch. ISPs can phase it in after most people aquire Trusted computers. The backbone itself could phase it in after most ISPs are compliant.

At that point it becomes possible to implement the following rule:

Only permit connections to other Trusted Computers that enforce this rule.

If you install that rule on the backbone then the backbone enforces that rule on ISPs and ISPs enforce it on your computer and your computer enforces it on your home network.

But even if you CAN still connect to the internet, your computer becomes increasingly non-functional. You can't connect to any Trusted subnet, you can't access an increasing number of Trusted websites, you can't install any new Trusted software, you can't access any Trusted files. In particular Microsoft has already started promoting Trusted e-mail. You'll increasingly get e-mail and other files from friends, family, and coworkers that will only be readable on a Trusted machine.

The whole methodology of the Embrace, Extend, and Exterminate tactic is that the ordinary people surrounding you start "punishing" you for refusing to submit. They send you an encrypted E-mail and it becomes YOUR fault and YOUR problem that you can't read it. YOU become the pain-in-the-ass problem with your obsolete computer and your annoying refusal to "upgrade". It's especially nasty when it's your boss trying to send you an e-mail and ordering you to fix YOUR problem.

-

Absolutely

[Delgul]

I have even been mailing with the (sorry) right wing party I normally vote for. Seems they are quite against the patent law as it was voted for some weeks back. It looks like a lot of politicians have been taken by surprise. They assured me, the next time would be better.

Nice and all, but since I trust those people exactly as far as I am able to see them, I think I will vote for a party with which have been voicing their opinion on this subject more prominently.

I have my own business to protect and since it is based on OSS, it seems that I am voting left wing this time to do so!

Patents are not about fostering innovation...

[Anonymous Coward]

They are about who is allowed to innovate...

Ultimate in irony!

[mabhatter654]

That a punk-kid college drop out started what's now a mulit-billion dollar company!! Where the irony comes in is that those very same companies...it doesn't matter who: Cisco, HP, SGI, nVidia, Microsoft, Apple...and the list goes on... Young out-of-work innovative kids. Would never have be allowed their success in today's world. The very companies they founded are continuing to work harder and harder to make sure that NEVER happens again... that's the lesson here more than anything else. Look where all the successful companies came from...so why do we need new/stricter laws?

Re:Ultimate in irony!

[pommiekiwifruit]

This is similar to how countries built on immigration (USA, Australia, England) don't want new immigrants, or how politicians who have had a free education at taxpayers expense vote for tuition fees for the next generation, or how Disney (a company built on extending public domain and not-so-public domain works) is the most keen on indefinately extending copyright to prevent other people from doing what they did.

The whole point is "screw you, kid; I've got mine!".

So how DO you hire people?

[SimonInOz]

It's hard.
I've been in countless interviews on both sides of the table.

It is very tough to a) tell the people you are capable and good (after all, what WOULD you say?) and b) to judge that.

You can only really judge a programmer after you have seen them in action for some time. But asking previous employers isn't going to help much - after all, he/she left/was fired/finished the contract.

So what do you do? I tend to run by gut feel - it works, but doesn't seem all that scientific . Frankly, I'd like a better way.

Depressing

[tsotha]

If European programmers aren't bound by these stupid patents while we (I'm in the US) are, the US software industry will just evaporate. Since Congress will see the writing on the wall, the US patent system will then be changed to something more reasonable.

If everybody in the world lines up with the US system, in the end only Microsoft and IBM will be legally able to write code.

Maybe the solution is for all the open source programmers to form some sort of guild and patent every damn stray thought like the big boys are doing. That way we'll have leverage if they threaten us. We can even set up do-nothing companies to sue Microsoft for patent infringement every time they fund an SCO or AdTI, you know, like whacking your dog with a rolled-up newspaper. Baaaaad Microsoft. Whack!

We've herd this logic before ...

[argoff]

Right now, they're trying to justify patents in the EU because of the great economic prosperity in the US. Unfortunately, it's not the first time those in the US has used this kind of argument...

To paraphrase "look at the great wealth and prosperity of the plantation system, the grand architecture, the vast and rich land, the free markets ... they paid for those slaves God blessed, surely that alone shows slavery is good, and the negros have been saved from their barbaric condition" ....

I wish I could say that patents are causing less harm, but when they recently lokcked out 10's of millions of Africans dying of AIDS from getting generics because "they had no incentive", because patents are "a property right", becasue "the wealth of the pharmasutical industry in the US is proof that patents work" ... etc. - it really causes me to think twice.

The people who know understand that the USA works because of freedom that exists inspite of patents, not becaus of them.

Stupid Question

[needacoolnickname]

I'm confused. Doesn't one have to show "how" the thing to be patented does what it does? I heard through the rumor mill that Coca-Cola won't patent it's formula because then others will now know how to copy it.

So if this is true (and it might be wrong, that's why I am asking) wouldn't a closed source company patenting something then make it's source open for all to see and look at?

Correct - explain - enlighten me, please.

Re:Stupid Question

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't have to show the source, just the way it's done.

For example, you don't have to show the source to a GUI, you can simply patent "a method for controlling a computer system graphically"

Though I'm not sure if GUI could be patented, but that's the way it works.

Re:Stupid Question

[OohAhh]

Yes, you can see it and look at it, the idea anyway, but you can't touch it. You can't even do anything like it because that would be illegal. In fact you may not be able to do anything remotely like it, unless you have the money to defend a patent based legal action.

Patents these days seem mostly be to exclude competitors and profit from the obvious and pre-existing.

Re:Stupid Question

[sql*kitten]

Correct - explain - enlighten me, please.

You are perfectly correct in your understanding. That's the whole point of the patent system. If you invent something, you've got a "head start" in commercializing it. Either you can use it exclusively, or someone can read your patent, decide that it's a good idea, and pay you a licensing fee so they can use it too. Eventually it passes into the public domain. What the anti-patent crowd is arguing that it should pass into the public domain immediately.

What they don't understand is that in a modern industrial economy, there is not necessarily any correlation between what something costs to reproduce and what it cost to create the very first one. Software that took 1 person 1 year to write costs as much to reproduce as something that took 1000 people 10 years. Patents mean that you can invest a lot of time and money and still have an opportunity to recoup that investment. Without patent protection, there is no incentive to invest.

Now, I'm not saying that the patent system works as it ought to at present. I am saying that the patent "algorithm" is sound; it is just poorly implemented in the US. The anti-patent group is composed of people who benefit from other people's research, yet have no intention of investing in research themselves.

Some Alternate History, Perhaps?

[Esion Modnar]

What if Xerox could have patented the concept of the Graphical User Interface, along with the mouse, and all that fun clicking, way back when?

Xerox could have sat on the idea, but sued Apple, Microsoft, and anybody else who came along with a use, into smouldering red-ink ruin.

The patent would have finally expired sometime around the early- to mid-90's.

Re:Some Alternate History, Perhaps?

[Anonymous Coward]

What if Xerox could have patented the concept of the Graphical User Interface, along with the mouse, and all that fun clicking, way back when?
They did, moron. Those patents are licensed to other companies, INCLUDING Apple.

Re:Some Alternate History, Perhaps?

[Anonymous Coward]

They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...

I'm pretty sure it's the penis that's first to go, because I can remember when it worked. I think.

Re:Some Alternate History, Perhaps?

[sql*kitten]

Xerox could have sat on the idea, but sued Apple, Microsoft, and anybody else who came along with a use, into smouldering red-ink ruin.

But why would they? More likely, they'd simply have licensed the ideas in return for a fee. That, incidentally, is what Xerox, Kodak and a bunch of other companies do for a large chunk of their revenue. They do research and license it out. ARM is based on a similar model.

Re:There is only one way to deal with software pat

[t_allardyce]

To print multiple slides on the same page just go
View->Workspace->Hand-out View

For the word count go
File->Properties->Statistics

It took me afew seconds to search for those in the help, but you only need to do that once. I think OpenOffice could drop-in replace Microsoft Office in 9 out of 10 environments, it might not be painless (i wouldnt want the challenge of trying to explain to an entire corporation that the word-count feature was now somewhere else) but if you can get over that its excellent.

Re:For God's sake...

[Anonymous Coward]

balance for balance's sake is stupid, if one side are extremist wackos (in this case, thinking that it's right to "own" ideas...geez...), you just end up swinging the pendulum towards them.

Re:There is only one way to deal with software pat

[Anonymous Coward]

hardly good UI design, though, is it? "Word count" would make sense as a "Tools" menu option.

Why, yes, it would. But, in their zeal to "replace" Microsoft Office, they put it in almost exactly the same place that M$ did (File->Properties->Statistics).

There are two interesting things here:
1. The grandparent of this post cticized a product he obviously was not familiar with (something I see quite often here; you'd think that Microsoft would at least let its trolls LOOK at the software they post about)
2. In copying M$ Office so slavishly, the writers of Star Office (and, by inheritance, Open Office) are copying what I consider to be an abominable UI. In the words of one reviewer "The good news is, it looks a lot like Microsoft Office; the bad news is, it looks a lot like Microsoft Office" (my paraphrase; I can't locate the review quickly).

Not that Open Office is all bad. I find the menu organization a lot more rational and thank whatever Gods you pray to that they did NOT copy the asinine way that Microsoft Office deals with Headers and Footers!

Open source

[Fullmetal Edward]

Hey, lets say everyone who releases software here must be fully trained with MS degrees and crap just so we can kill Open source and give Microsoft all the money we fined them back through customers.

Re:Slowing Down = Bad for everyone

[cbreaker]

Open Source/GPL/Etc does not make you immune to patent infringement. If Microsoft patents 1's and 0's, you won't be able to use them in your Open Source application, same as everyone else.

So sure, you can write applications free of patents with a great open source license, but you still can't write code that uses someone's patented "idea."

I think it hurts Open Source. Whereas Microsoft can purchase an expensive license to use someone's patented idea, Open Source projects can not.

OMFG

[Anonymous Coward]

Like corporate executives are doing what's best for society as a whole. The reason the US supposedly follows the free market is that it forces corporations to act resposibly, because if they don't, they lose business to companies who do. The article essentially says that the US is trying to legislate oligopolies in the EU.

OMFG

Re:For God's sake...

[Anonymous Coward]

So you can't be a "extremist wacko" if you are a open source-zealot? Why are you afraid of swinging the pendulum?

By the way; who decides that one thing is better than the other? Nobody.

Willy nilly development

[Brandybuck]

suffer from willy-nilly software development by individuals who have not been screened, approved, and trained by corporate human resources professionals

I work for Siemens. A rather huge multinational based in Germany. That's Germany as in "right there in the middle of Europe". Maybe the neo-anarchist software developers of Antwerp and Barcelona are a different story, but the software developers from Germany are the epitome of "screened, approved and trained" mobile resources.

Tell a German that product is more important than process, and they'll call the men in the white suits to haul you away! To them, process is the product, and what you sell to generate revenue is merely icing on the cake.

Re:Willy nilly development

[12357bd]

Maybe the neo-anarchist software developers of Antwerp and Barcelona are a different story

Could you please elaborate a little more about those developers? I know programmers form both places but never heard about 'neo-anarchist' ones.

What's in a sig?

Re:Willy nilly development

[kraut]

I'm soooooo glad I left the country ;)

Re:Willy nilly development

[pommiekiwifruit]

I thought there was news recently that Siemens was losing a lot of development jobs. Which is a shame, since I was once offered an interview in Regensberg, which might have been interesting.

Re:Willy nilly development

[Brandybuck]

It's sarcasm. If a professional software programmer doesn't have a several layers of bosses over them telling them to follow the productivity destroying process, then it's akin to anarchy. At least from the Siemens perspective...

Software Patents are good

[sproketboy]

But they should be limited to a 6 month life-span after which they go to the public domain. 6 months IMO is plenty of time to bring an idea to market with software.
Like double-clicking. :)

Re:Software Patents are good

[Halo1]

You can't do that, because the US made it illegal in the international TRIPs treaty to create special conditions for certain kinds of patents. Either you allow patents on something and these patents are exactly the same as all other patents you allow, or you don't allow patents on something (and then you have to argue that this something can either not be an invention, or does not belong to a field of technology).

Hard Reality...

[3seas]

Father physics and mother nature don't give a flip about man made constraints and to prove it, man in his effort to deny father physics and mother nature .... well for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

ie. the hindu arabic decimal system took 300 years to become main stream due to the vested interest the elite accountants had in the far more limitating roman numerals.

Computing as we know it today could not have been invented with the limitations of the roman numeral system,

That is a loss of 300 years of where we could have been today in computer technology.

The computer industry has often talked about a new economy... yet it is this false and man fabricated constraint of patents that has in fact actually prevented it.

do you see the equal and opposite reaction?

the more man denies reality = the less man is able to profit from reality.

Bill Gates yelled "Piracy" in 1975 and that caused a disruption in teh natural evolution of software development, a denial of father physics and mother nature.

His deception is now catching up with him as teh natural evolution fo software development is overcomming such deceivers, exposing them for the false constraint cheats they are.

The patent system has become a tool more so for the cheats then for being in accord with teh genuine reason for the creation of teh patent system. It has evlved in exactly the opposite direction as to what it should have, had it been following teh original intents.

This pretty much is the route to go in exposing the falseness of the patent systems, in regards especially to software.

What you cannot patent are natural law, physical phenomenon and abstract ideas. As well mathmatical algorythims are included on that list....

So.... you cannot patent the natural laws of the physical phenomenon of abstraction creation and use, not even thru mathmatical algorythim machines.

Most all software patents are invalid and this can be clearly seen if only looked at from a POV in accord with father physics and mother nature.

What the act of false man made constraints results in is the extraction of unearned wealth from those deceived, by those deceiving.

Its said that teh truth will set you free.... But I say you need honesty before you can see the truth... And when all around you is not honest.....

Re:For God's sake...

[Anonymous Coward]

So you can't be a "extremist wacko" if you are a open source-zealot?

Er, no. Open Sourcers are moderates - they pander to business interests unlike Free Software people, and Free software people are themselves moderates compared to the total freedom of information (i.e. no I"P" at all) people. Total-I"P" and No-I"P" would be the extremist poles. WIPO is pretty close to Total-I"P".

By the way; who decides that one thing is better than the other? Nobody.

Everyone decides for themselves,really. Not "nobody".

Anyway, Slashdot doesn't make any claim to be unbiased, it has always been officially pro-information-freedom and is a kind of "blog" in modern parlance of Roblimo, CmdrTaco and a few others. If you want the "balance" you crave, try some neofascist site like PNAC.

Yes - I'll vote for Green

[Anonymous Coward]

I will vote Green because of this issue.

Re:Because, you know, HR people can REALLY pick em

[thogard]

Many HR deprtments sole job is to keep themselves empolyed until the next wave of hirings happen. Then they switch to filter mode where their job is to filter resumes and do pre-interviews so they don't waste the time of the group thats needs a body to do work. The problem with this is when the HR dept's likes aren't compatable with say the engineering team.

What the heck - use it against them.

[Gordon Bennett]

If the EU grants patents, why, wouldn't it be just peachy for free/open source projects to patent all their techniques and plough the revenue from commercial licensing into anti-corporate organisations and charities?
Now that's Irony.

Re:What the heck - use it against them.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hacking out some code in your bedroom? Come up with something interesting? Got that $5000 spare under the mattress to patent it?

Re:There is only one way to deal with software pat

[dustmite]

In copying M$ Office so slavishly, the writers of Star Office (and, by inheritance, Open Office) are copying what I consider to be an abominable UI.

Heh, I often used to wonder why the idiocy of if you want to edit headers/footers in Word, you have to use the view menu. Then someone explained it to me: WordPerfect used to have it like that, and back when WordPerfect was the dominant word processor, Microsoft just copied them to make it easier for people to migrate to their software. Then everyone learned where it is, in the wrong place, so now they can't put it where it belongs, under "Edit".

Re:Because, you know, HR people can REALLY pick em

[LaCosaNostradamus]

To be fair to the HR people themselves, they are particularly stressed from compression between these forces:

1. People seeking work and willing to lie, cheat and steal to get it.
2. Internal policies that are frankly illegal, if not outrightly immoral.

We ask (or demand) that HR vet the population which has members representing force#1. That alone is quite stressful, and with all the law governing the selection process, we arrive at force#2. Let's face facts; managers don't willingly do things like hire 1 women into a group of loudmouthed guys, and vice versa. (If you don't think it works in the reverse, guys, just try to get a job in a library, bookstore, etc. Odds are you'll encounter resistance to the undercurrent of "women only".) Managers of all types have all manner of biases and states of ignorance, and gender, race, marital status, etc. all come into play without prompting.

When it comes to workplace biases, about the only ways the government catches all this prejudice is (1) the company is small enough that they screw up and let a bias become readily apparent, or (2) the company is large enough that statistical methods can show a likely pattern of bias. Between these two conditions of exposure, we have a vast range of law breaking.

I've done it myself. I worked for a plating company that made it quite clear that, in general, women and blacks were not welcome. The women were seen as potential lawsuits in general ("you hire 'em and they start filing suits, so forget it"), and specifically for their reaction to the usual array of porn that tends to lay around such a facility. The blacks were not welcome since the good 'ol boys working the lines were profoundly racist; hence, who really wants to invoke strife in the production lines?

(I never want to get involved in such a small, inbred business again. I want to avoid feelign dirty in that particular way that washing cannot alleviate.)

I am very skeptical about the (you'll note, primarily female) HR population. But I have to hand them the (small) olive branch of peace and understanding with the pressures they endure.

What would Yakov say about this?

[Anonymous Coward]

In Russia sarcastic editorials patent YOU!

Spirit Vs. Reality

[john_anderson_ii]

I think I believe wholeheartedly in the spirit in which patent law was created. Put plainly, this spirit was to protect the inventor of a specific item. Such as a specific blender with a specific motor, and specific blades. In this way, larger competitors could not produce the exact same item, undercut him, and recieve the fruits of his labors.

Times have changed though and unfortunately they have changed for the worse. Now it seems that coprorations are using the patent system as a tool to stifle competition. The claims for patents are getting more and more vague, thus covering a broader and broader scope. In the not too distant past it would have been unheard of to pantent "Software Compression", it would be considered imprudent, where patenting as specific method of software compression using a specific library and a specific algorithm would have been ok. I think the current patent laws would suffice quite nicely if the US Patent Office would wake up and reject patents applications that are frivilous and obviously not in accordance with the spirit of U.S. Patent Law.

Re:Spirit Vs. Reality

[Anonymous Coward]

I think I believe wholeheartedly in the spirit in which patent law was created. Put plainly, this spirit was to protect the inventor of a specific item. Such as a specific blender with a specific motor, and specific blades. In this way, larger competitors could not produce the exact same item, undercut him, and recieve the fruits of his labors.

This, to me, sounds dead wrong. The way I've heard it, the intent of copyrights and patents is to prevent people from keeping things secret, recent SCOTUS majority ruling (Eldred v. Ashcroft) notwithstanding. It's an incentive to publicize their creations and inventions.

Is creating a blender with a specific motor and specific blades[1] so novel? There really needs to be something else to justify awarding a patent to a particular mixing of pieces. Something that, if it was successfully[2] kept a secret, would hinder progress. Remember, patents are for ideas, copyrights are for implementations.

[1] Alas, you haven't specified what you mean by "specific" - here I'm interpreting as "off the shelf", but perhaps you meant "novel design", but in that case the motor and blades should be patented on their own, the combination of all of the above isn't necessarily that novel.

[2] Can business methods deployed for public use on the Internet or elsewhere (e.g. Amazon one-click) really be kept secret? I'd say no, as the user needs to know how to perform their part of said method and might likely figure out the rest.

Re:Spirit Vs. Reality

[jafac]

The Constitution describes PRECISELY what the Spirit of Patent Law is:
". . . To promote the useful arts and sciences. . "

Anything more than that is influence peddling, and corporate welfare. Plain and simple.

That might as well not exist for most users

[ShatteredDream]

OpenOffice needs to put that and other commonly used features in areas that are close to where the user will be working. Most people don't even bother to use Help because they often cannot even think of what to type into the help search.

Re:That might as well not exist for most users

[Anonymous Coward]

But it IS a statistic, about the file you are editing. One may even call a statistic a "property" of the file.

It doesn't make any sense, until you realise that there is a place for statistics (i.e. quantitative measurements of your text).

American Lobbying Welcome

[Karl-Friedrich Lenz]

to all opponents of software patents in Europe.

That's not only because the American president is not particularly popular in Western Europe, so whenever Americans open their mouth, Europeans are likely to do the exact opposite right now.

It's also because even those who fight for software patents have to pretend they don't want the extremism that passes for patent policy in America these days. Even they must appear to oppose business method patents, for example.

That means that any open assistance American assistance for the project to sell out the European software industry to American patent holders will backfire. It will help the opponents of said project.

That in turn means that all opponents of legalizing software patents in Europe should welcome all the clueless interventions on part of the American government.

I love patents

[Anonymous Coward]

If corporations patent software, and provide the disclosure of the source code for the patent and if you shortened the protection period of software patents to 3 to 5 computer generations, It would provide that protection for innovators, and yet allow the proliferation of these technologies in reasonable time. Let say IBM DOS was patented in Feburary of 1981. After 7 to 10 years it becomes public domain, so today the free dos project could be the real thing. If source code was provided in the patent disclosure. But 20 year patents don't make sense in software, and I feel that with most software, the winner is demonstrated by the market, and not by the patent

Re:Because, you know, HR people can REALLY pick em

[lifebouy]

I respect your comment, and you make some good arguments, but I just cannot like HR ppl. It's like the military: I can't get a real job, so I'll go for an HR position. In general, HR people make my skin crawl the same way as used car salesmen, polititians, apartment finders(who thought up this crap? Does nothing but chase up apartment prices), SCO employees, and closed source advocates do. You know they are in it for the wrong reasons. You know they are strait out lying to get something from you, be it a buck or a vote or an answer that will disqualify you for a job.

Don't extend an olive leaf, extend a fire hose and wash the slime from those ppl:)

Re: It is...

[symbolic]

Nowadays, it seems like corporate managers look down on the programmers and the software, as if it's a given that software is some mindless trivial crap that takes two seconds to bang together, and the fact that it takes a really long time to engineer is scorned and look down upon.

Much of it is mindless trivial crap. We have Microsoft, at least in part, to thank for this, a la Visual Basic and its other "visual" stuff. This phenomenon is a natural consequence of a process that has been dumbed down, and fueled by a market that was, at least at one point, saturated with people who were only after the money.

we don't want no f***ing software patents

[clsc]

it's quite simple really. We don't want them and we certainly don't need them. Common copyright is adequate enough.

The current situation in the US with patents on right clicking, single click purchase, double clicking.. granted, it's mechanics and not software per se, but still... it's simply ridiculous.

EU and American relations

[Trepidity]

It's harder to say these days things like "the EU doesn't much like us at the moment". Many of the new EU countries, especially Poland, are pretty strongly pro-US.

Simple

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft failed to kill Linux with SCO, so now they are using the EU (well, the EC to be technical - the EU voted for limits on patents last year).

"why doesn't the EU want advice from the guys down in the trenches? Is it impossible to get some body of government that listens to the people instead of greedy corporations who pay them off?"

Remember, they complained about Open Source lobbyists last year (probably because they didnt bring suitcases full of used Euros).

Green Party.

[h4rm0ny]

The strongest party in the UK against Software Patents is (as usual) the Green Party.

A quote from the party:
The GP strongly opposes software patenting. Copyright works well enough to protect IPR (Intellectual Property Rights). The flag of IPR must not be used to give more power to rich corporations while preventing the general use of useful cheap software.

Google for more info, but a couple of links are here:
http://www.greenparty.org.uk/index.php?nav=article s &n=68>First Link
Second Link

The second link recommends either the UKIP or Green Party for restricting EU control over the UK, but vote Green for the less xenophobic, racist and altogether saner option.

Re:Green Party.

[javax]

Funny, the strongest party against software patents in Germany now is the FDP (liberals).

The green party seems to have lost its spirit in this point due to being part of the government...

This doesn't actually apply to us...

[Anonymous Coward]

...in my (european) company, US represents about half of our market. We can not allow our products to be encumbered by US patents, because we can not afford to lose half of our market. So as long as the EU patent system doesn't get worse than the US one, we aren't really affected that much.

Besides, I think we have some obvious bullshit patents to defend us... If anyone sues us, we'll just cross license our obvious bullshit patents with their obvious bullshit patents.

In the UK.

[h4rm0ny]

The Green Party in the UK has a well thought out policy on Software Patents and IPR. A quote from their site:

The GP strongly opposes software patenting. Copyright works well enough to protect IPR (Intellectual Property Rights). The flag of IPR must not be used to give more power to rich corporations while preventing the general use of useful cheap software.

The only thing I'll add to their words is that the Green Party traditionally does well in the European Elections, so a vote for them can make a real difference. Also, where they don't get in, more votes for them is still more pressure on other parties to adopt similar policies.

The only other party that has a strong stance on this is the UK Independance Party, but that's only because they hate all foreigners. Greens are the saner (and less racist) option in the UK.

Not enough

[12357bd]

Numbers, greed and ignorance are all they infinite. If a program is nothing more than a mathematical formulae, why not directly allow the patentability of numbers?
That way corporations will find an infinite source of revenue!
Let them follow the Midas path. :)

What's in a sig?

What garbage

[mark99]

This is perhaps what many with exclusively Open Source or hobby exerience think, but anyone who has worked in big and/or little commerical software firms knows that this is total garbage.

Commericial programmers are often rejected and ejected by their peers or superiors for poor performance.

And Open Source software quality is at least as variable its commerical counterparts.

The only "insightful" comment here is that popular Open Source code profits from a massive peer review that commericial software cannot provide. But this observation has been often made by many (for example by Microsoft in the original Halloween document, if my memory servers me right).

I think a comment that superficial is not deserving of so many points.

Re:There is only one way to deal with software pat

[Anonymous Coward]

hardly good UI design, though, is it?

What? So, listing the word count, which is statistical information, in a table of statistics is not good UI design? Bearing in mind that statistical information is a property of a file, I should say it's a perfect design choice.

What you meant to say is: this isn't how Microsoft does it, therefore I don't like it.

Kiss my ass (tm)

[startxxx]

no comment

Can't You See The Humor?

[tilleyrw]

1. Newsforge is a Linux site.
2. The document contains inflammatory statements.

3. Therefore, the article is satirical.

Granted, it reads very close to an actual article. The best satire is barely detectable as satire.

Many props to the author!

I hope it is humor, if it's not it is scary.

Today you mean

[pommiekiwifruit]

Some of us are ahead of our EU partners :-) (elections in the UK are always held on a Thursday).

Unfortunately in the North West they have rolled back the reform acts of the 19th century and got rid of the idea of a secret ballot. With a mass postal ballot a patriarch can just collect a load of ballot papers and fill them in himself.

Re:There is only one way to deal with software pat

[drew]

With academia firmly against proprietary software giants, we can use universities as a weapon against them.

ha! hardly.... universities love proprietary software makers. they pour tons of money into schools to get students hooked on their software. my school switched all of it's introductory CS labs over to microsoft visual c++ about a year or so before i started (over the strenuosu objections of many faculty and students) because microsoft gave them a really sweet deal. and i highly doubt that they paid several thousand dollars a piece for the hundreds of computers that have autocad installed on them in the architecture and mechanical engineering labs...

Belgian opinion

[desalien]

EU indeed is upset by US for it's current way of 'controlling' the whole globe I myself live in Belgium and what people think around here is: US? I don't care about what they do, just a continent like any other. Bush? Get a new president, bush is really funny on TV (EU viewpoint) especially his "may god bless america" sentence :-P (were we say 'may god bless the globe") US Software patents? WTF will they never stop patending everything? Just like they did on the pregnance tests, and that sucks! (a pregnance test costed 10 once, these day's it's over 30) What will this mean to software! US Software patents? (political view) Is a good income for the country, just like building bombs for another country!

Yup...

[Anonymous Coward]

A country that is only service level and produces nothing based is like having a country full of bugerflippers and salesmen...*starts looking at the USA and outsourcing knowledge farms*

Re:Because, you know, HR people can REALLY pick em

[torokun]

Ummm. Sure, HR people are crap a lot of times, but everywhere I've worked they've done technical interviews, and when I've interviewed people for programming jobs, I've done technical interviews.

Whenever I had any input, basically we used HR to tell us whether the person was kosher in general, and our own determinations as to whether they were competent...

Radicals?

[JuggleGeek]

The article starts with these two sentances.

European free software advocates, Green Party activists, Socialists, economists, small business owners, and other radicals are working to keep the European Union from instituting U.S.-style software patents. But don't give up hope.

Radicals? Yes, those radical "economists", the horrible "small business owners", and Oh-My-God, the dreaded "free software advocates"! Horrors! No better than terrorists, most of them...

Re:There is only one way to deal with software pat

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it IS how microsoft does it, you doofus. and no, it isn't good UI design - it goes the wrong way, from the general to the specific - good ui design would give a "word count..." option that opened the statistics page showing the word count, allowing the user to discover other useful statistics. Maximisation of discoverability is something very important in UIs.

Re:There is only one way to deal with software pat

[sql*kitten]

We really need for a group like Knoppix to make a LiveCD

Personally, I have no idea whatsoever about what a Knoppix is. Or a Gentoo for that matter. Or a Debian.

And I'm not "joe public", I was using Linux professionally in '96! Yes, getting paid to run Linux as a full time job. I do know what I'm talking about.

The open source community, if it wants to make any inroads into public acceptance, has got to lose this obsession with stupid names. Microsoft learnt this years ago. "Windows", "Word", "Access", "Office", all of these are everyday words that have at least a basic reference to what those pieces of software actually do.