Slashdot Mirror
Munich's Linux Migration Raises EU Patent Issues
J ROC writes "Techweb has a story about the German city of Munich's Windows-to-Linux migration. It appears the move to replace 14,000 Windows desktops with Linux has hit a bump. Green Party alderman Jens Muehlhaus, who is a supporter of open-source software, has petitioned the mayor to examine the status of software patents in the European Community. The issue involves a proposed directive on software patents that is being considered by various European governments. Muehlhaus fears that a patent owner could issue a cease-and-desist order against Munich, thus hurting the operation of various city departments."
I would think that given MS's past history of "borowing" ideas, they are as open to patent issues as anyone else. So what do they suggest Munich (and everyone else) do? Stop using software?
I wish I had thought of it! The only way to make the government see that software patents are bad is to show them that they've got something to lose!! GENIUS!
EU software patent directive makes Munich's Unix migration difficult.
The moment Germany caved on Software Patents they ensured that free software would require licenses simply to continue to exist and be compatible with any commercial software.
Hence, any government (e.g. Munich) hoping to use open source or free software will eventually be unable to do so and still retain compatibility with common commercial software. It's a foregone conclusion.
Case in point: Samba. It's only a matter of months before Microsoft uses patents to kill Samba and all similar communications compatibility with Open Source software. How will this affect Munich?
I really do hope this brings the German delegation to the EU back to their senses, but I fear it's too late. By the way, the ffii site seems to be down. Anyone know why?
Read the warranty you get from MS and find the bit where they offer you more than the GPL does.
It's not more vulnerable with respect to legal matters. It might be financially more vulnerable though as opensource projects can't afford to fend themselves even against bogus patent claims. Open sorce projects often have less patens to use for cross licencing.
In many European countries the situation is somewhat better than in the US as the loosing part in a trial pays the legal fees for both parties. That might make it less tempting to make bogus patent claims.
God is REAL! Unless explicitly declared INTEGER
The difference is that the Windows license doesn't preclude you from coming to agreement with the patent holder. Basically if it's patented, it can't be distributed under the GPL.
Anything that makes politicians sit up and think about the horrors of patents in today's world is good.
The danger of course is that they'll think for 3 seconds only, and conclude that they need proprietary software instead of free, since its manufacturer then picks up any liability for royalties.
In contrast, if they could be made to think for just a little bit longer, they might realize that patents would only a problem in this case if they remained hidden underwater and surfaced later when profits were smelled. That would be easy for a government agency to counteract in advance, since politicians are singularly well placed to force patent holders to register claims by a specific date to assist in government planning. This would flush submarines up very nicely.
Submarining is truly the main evil with patents, since it prevents people from planning ahead to avoid liabilities, as well as feeding the parasitic squatter instead of the inventors. If patent holders lost the ability to claim royalties when they remained hidden, much of the problem could be averted.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
Click here to read about a patent case involving Rockwell and a lawsuit generating company called Solaia. They decided to go after Rockwell's costomers and not just Rockwell. The customers sued Rockwell and Rockewell is now going after the Solaia's lawfirm for making the suit. This thing makes the SCO case look like a picnic, but in this case only proprietary software and technology and licensing is involved. Now of course these end-users are actually big corporations like Clorox and Shell which is probably one reason the suits were filed. I have not heard of patent suits where customers at a department store or mall get sued for their purchase, but do not rule out that possibility. It could happen. The point is using proprietary systems and licenses with big corporations does not put you in the clear of liabilities.
A few days ago, we had a post from the person from the Stargate website, asking for donations. Common sense would dictate that perhaps a more objective source than one of the parties involved in the litigation... oh well.
Today there was a Mozilla vulnerability thing and I clicked on the "proof of concept" and my X server almost locked up and I had to ssh in from another machine to kill it. "As if" someone wouldn't notice there was something wrong.
Now, this.
Where does one go to get an objective opinion of things. You know?
It just ain't right. People need to chill out, man... life ain't that grim!
all this patenting is acctually a good thing, ...
because you can't re-patent (or shouldn't be
able too) after the patent has run out
so after one hundred and some odd years of
patenting, there is definitely alot of good ideas
around you can implement for free.
me thinks if law firms are having a blast, then
detective agencies for patents must have an equal
good market!
keep patenting, make it free!