Slashdot Mirror
EU Software Patents Delayed Again
Lord An writes "It seems the decision about software patents in Europe has been delayed again for at least a week (link in German). Once again we have to thank Poland that the corresponding item was removed from the A-list of the Council of Agriculture and Fisheries. Hopefully this delay will be enough that the opposition vs. the patents will finally get the upper hand." Non-German speakers might find it useful to plug that URL into the Fish.
what's with you guys - hurry it up, I can't RTFA !
The European Union is attempting to pass a Directive that will force many European governments to permit patents on software despite growing protests from software engineers and small European software companies. Opponents fear that software patents will stifle innovation and competition in their industry, increasing their legal costs, while leaving them at the mercy of large companies who have the resources to acquire large numbers of patents. The Directive is supported by trade groups dominated by large multinational software companies, along with national patent offices who generate revenue from patent applications. A patent is a fearsome weapon, not only does it prevent someone from copying an invention, it also prevents them from independently inventing the same thing. This means that you could spend your entire life sitting in a cave, with no contact with the outside world, and anything you invent could still infringe other people's patents. In contrast, a copyright only prevents other people from copying your work. If you copyright a poem and someone else, by chance, happens to write the same poem without copying yours, then they are not infringing your copyright.
The purpose of patents, indeed all forms of intellectual property, is to promote the arts and sciences. Patents achieve this by granting an inventor exclusive control over their invention for a limited time. In return, the inventor is required to disclose their invention so that after the limited time expires, it is freely available to the rest of society. Society benefits when this provides an incentive for inventors to invent, where otherwise they might not have bothered.
A patent isn't just granted on an idea for an invention, it can only be granted once you have a prototype, or at least the ability to teach someone how to build a prototype, this is known as a "teachable invention". Patents therefore motivate an inventor to take their idea and invest the time and money to develop it into a teachable invention. In return for this, and a small fee, inventors are granted a 20 year monopoly over their invention.
This monopoly is not granted without a price. Every invention builds on those that came before, yet for the duration of a patent nobody else can build on a patented invention without the permission of the inventor. This creates a cost for society, and other inventors. Patents work when the benefit to society of having the invention outweighs the cost of the inventor's monopoly over it.
In a field such as pharmaceuticals, a vast investment may be required to get from an idea for a new drug, to the drug itself. In this case, it is easy to see how a patent on this drug will benefit society if it provides sufficient motivation to the drug's inventor to make the investment required to invent it. Software, however, is very different. Getting from an idea to a prototype in software requires very little investment and risk. This is the great strength of software. Its why Bill Gates, a college drop-out, could build a multi-billion dollar company out of nothing but the ideas in his head. Its why Linus Torvalds could later sow the seeds of an operating system built by volunteers that would challenge that multi-billion dollar company.
Patents should not apply to software for the simple reason that they would do far more harm than good, harming creativity rather than promoting it. Software doesn't need patents, copyright is more than adequate to provide the incentive software engineers need to turn their ideas into software. The cost to society of a 20 year monopoly over a software invention will never be justified, because it is inconceivable that any software invention could require such a powerful incentive. The price for this monopoly is paid by other inventors, and so the effect is to stifle innovation, not to promote it.
Unfortunately software is not the only fie
The of Luxembourg council presidency explained itself after information from diplomat circles ready to shift the planned official verabschiedung of the disputed position of the Minister committee as the guideline over the patenting bar of "computer-implemented inventions" again around one week. Instead of of the agrarian and fishery advice on Monday in May the point of view fastened under troubles is therefore to be abgenickt on 31 January in the advice for general questions and external relations. From the further delay above all the proponents of a complete restart now nearly for three years of the running legislative procedure in the European Union parliament could profit. Once more made the Polish government pressure on the Luxemburger. Thus the advised point disappeared after information of German Ministry representatives at Friday noon of yesterday of the agenda of the agrarian advice. More than one week delay did not want to grant the council presidency Poland however. In the new entry country in the course of the week the European Union committee of the government had exerted itself seriously for a shift, since the position of Poland was not yet finally co-ordinated to the past advice point of view. The European Hightech branch federation EICTA, to which companies belong such as Microsoft, Nokia, SAP or Siemens, reacted disappointed to the time extension. The "uncertainty" for enterprises will now continue to persist still after the many months of the treatment of the guideline suggestion, was called it with EICTA. The industry needs the extended patent protection for genuine, software using inventions urgently. A speaker of the promotion association for a free Informationelle infrastructure (FFII) welcomed the grace period against it as "positively". Crucial now the further negotiations are in the European parliament to a way out of the festgefahrenen situation according to software patent opponents. In the constant back and forth the advice sees Florian Mueller, Manager of the campaign NoSoftwarepatents.com, an indication for the fact that the Minister committee begs "formally for a restart of the procedure". The delegates would have to accept this "invitation". This applies particularly to prominent union politicians in the European Union parliament, who had stated so far doubts against a new start, said Mueller. They could shift "the mortal blow" as a parliamentary group most powerful with distance now the "inexpressible" advice text. If the Minister committee at the end of should refer January actually publicly a rejecting position, one period up to the beginning of the then following Plenarwoche would remain for the parliamentarians on 21 February for requesting a new beginning. (Stefan Krempl)
The memories of a man in his old age are the deeds of a man in his prime - Floyd, Pink
No no no, that's not how it works. If you want to make a HHGTTG reference you should do it properly: You don't plug anything in the fish. You plug the fish in your ear, that's how it's done!
A sensible look from most would show that software patents are a bad idea.
A language makes something possible and therefore you should be able to do it.
MS would not have been able to create the windows monopoly it now enjoys is xerox & apple had patents for windowing systems. If somebody had created an overly vuage patent such as "a mechanism for storing bits of data on a disk" then we may not even have had file systems.
These things are bad news!
I know that with software patents you have to seed them properly before you can harvest them later, but can somebody explain to me what it is doing on the agenda of the council of agriculture and fisheries?
bash$
I find it annoying. I wish patents could be done away with completely. I dont know if other slashdot readers agree, but it goes against the fostering of new software, improvements and so on.
Referring to a previous slashdot article on Microsoft causing price reductions in software... Software patents and price reduction go hand in hand. The reason I think this is because the only way to compete with companies with a huge market share, such as microsoft, is to either (a) Get more patents, to screw them back, or (b) to copy what they are doing (at least make it very similar, without infringing on patents) and make the price much lower.
The only way, then, to heal the software industry it to do away with patents. That way, the person with the best product can charge what he wants, not the only person with the product.
Basically, patents == monopoly, which is saddening.
In this new era of globalization, it is important to assess the directions in which the EU responds towards technological progress. Soon the implications will affect US economy, and in such capacity, such forward thinking forecasts can provide useful insight into the direction of the marketplace.
...poland.
This was also reported on Friday in eWeek here.
WITH YET ANOTHER COUNCIL DELAY, JURI IS STILL OUT ON SOFTWARE PATENTS
Poland requests another delay of the adoption of the EU Council's common position on a software patent directive -- JURI (legal affairs committee of the European Parliament) may ask for restart of entire legislative process next week
Brussels (24 January 2005). At the request of Poland, the EU Council once again postponed the adoption of a so-called common position on a software patent directive, which had been planned for today. That new delay opens a window of opportunity for JURI, the legal affairs committee of the European Parliament, to restart the hotly contested legislative process. JURI will meet in Brussels on Wednesday and Thursday of next week (February 2nd and 3rd), and will decide on requesting a restart of the entire legislative process. According to anti-software-patent campaigners, there is a good chance that a majority of JURI members will vote for a restart, and support is said to be broadening.
Florian Müller, campaign manager of NoSoftwarePatents.com, calls on supporters to contact their MEPs and "launch an all-out offensive for the restart because it is by far and away the best chance to prevent the legalization of software patents in the EU. In fact, it may be our only realistic chance. This is the moment of truth." ...
Paul "Say no to feeping creaturism"
The biggest story here is the way the European Parliament and associated croonies keep on trying to get this directive through the backdoor without no reference to the rules, law or democratic society.
Fisheries and Agriculture? The people behind this must be offering big backhanders to all involved to push this through at all costs, that's all I can say.
But it's good news in whatever language :-)
Christian Engström, Former Member of the European Parliament 2009-2014 for The Pirate Party, Sweden
eWeek
Did he inhale?
Once again it's the poorer member states in the EU who have to stand in the way of globalisation and giant companies trying to punish the smaller companies.
I really do wonder about the EU commission, undemocratically elected and accusations of corruption are nothing new (the whole commission resigned a few years back).
We already have patents for computer-implemented inventions in the UK. 20% of patents are for the above. Here's a few sentences on open source, even though your letter doesn't mention it. That's because we're sending you a boilerplate letter. The UK supports the EU Directive on software patents. We think UK innovators and users, especially small firms want software patents. There's no evidence that software patents will harm the industry. Not even in America. The EU Directive will only clarify the current law, not change it. UK Government did a consultation exercise in autumn 2000, which concluded that the status quo of having software patents is the best position. I'd never heard of this consultation. DTI is about the private sector. Nowhere in the letter does it reference my concern: the public sector.
I think that delaying and then defeating patents in Europe is the best opportunity that we have in the USA to get the subject revisited. There is a need to have some uniformity in patent laws throughout the world, or at least with our major trading partners; if we (or more accurately, Europeans) can get Europe to defeat software patents or at least demand that they truly be inventive and not the next logical step in programming (a la one click) then there will be a need to have the two systems brought closer together. If Europe stands opposed to them, and America (Adobe/Micro$oft) stands for them then hopefully they will be forced to compromise. Not that a compromise is a good solution for us but I believe a negotiation like this is the best hope/chance that we have at bringing our patent system in line with what our Founding Fathers had in mind: "To Promote the Useful Arts and Sciences". As long as US politicians are bought and paid for by the big corporations there is no other way that this issue will come up for discussion in either the House or the Senate.
Restore America: Dr. Ron Paul for President!
"Cat got your tongue? (something important seems to be missing from your comment ... like the body or the subject!)"
duh...
... about Poland!!!
Due to the general election in Denmark the socialist party has withdrawn it's support for the software patent directive and demanded that the current government blocks the decision at least untill after the election on february 8.
A rt icleID=26766
Effectively, this means that if the minister of economy votes in favor of the directive on january 31, he will be forced to withdraw his vote when he returns.
Article (in danish):
http://www.computerworld.dk/default.asp?Mode=2&
Regardless of whether you are for or against patents on computer programs, the bigger issue here seems to be that the European Council contiously tries to sabotage the democratic process.
I generally do not keep track of what's happening in Europe politically, but if what's going on in the area of software patents is indicative of the way the E.U. is governed in general, we are in big trouble indeed.
I live in Europe, and the EU IS a corruption heaven. The way software patents are pushed against any democratic principles is outrageous and frightening. The most logic explanation is massive corruption in one way or the other. Parent is saying just that.
There should be more people active in this discussion.
I think it dimishes our democracys (in europe) if we allow for the Europe Council circunvent the vote and opinio of the democratically elected European Parlament.
There should be enough geeks * near the strings of power to make those in power aware of their needs.
If that is not the case, we have to make enough noise until we are heard and the European Parlament Directives get aproved
* I use geek in the thecnological savvy meaning.
I'm trying to get modded "Interesting Flamebait Informative and Insightful Redundant Troll" *-* Please Help *-*
The Dane Valdemar Poulsen (who also invented the telephone answering machine) came up with a "Method of, and apparatus for, effecting the storing up of speech or signals by magnetically influencing magnetisable bodies".
n .htm)
Also, a German engineer named Fritz Pfleumer in 1928 demonstrated a magnetic recorder of his own design which used paper tape coated with steel dust.
(ref: http://www.amps.net/newsletters/issue27/27_poulse
"Good news, everyone!"
In a discussion on software patents, I think stating that The European Union is attempting (...) as you do is rather meaningless. What do you mean by "the European Union"? The Commission, which is for? The Parliament, which is against? The Council, which is severely divided on the issue?
The truth is that this is a very controversial issue inside the EU institutions, with a complex balance between the pro and anti sides, and that for now at least there is no single, or even no dominant, "European view" on the subject.
It would be more truthful to have something like "The European Commission and some European governments are attempting to pass (...)" instead.
What do you know about World Politic? Find out in this quiz
"Thank you for your letter, which I read with interest, and the points
you made. The Labour MEPs' position on software patents is reflected in
the amendments we tabled and voted for in the Parliament's report on the
Commission proposal on the patentability of computer-implemented
inventions. In short, the position remains:
* No US-style patenting of software.
* Software as such, must not be patented. No patenting of
business methods or "general ideas"
* Opensource software must be allowed to flourish and the
Commission must ensure that this Directive does not have any adverse
effect on opensource software and small software developers.
* Patents and the threat of litigation must not be used as an
anti-competitive weapon to squeeze out small companies.
The Member States and European Commission will negotiate with Parliament
on our amendments and we hope we can achieve an outcome which will limit
and restrict the patentability of computer-implemented inventions.
As you are aware the European Patent Office has already handed down some
40,000 software patents and without an EU directive we could end up
drifting towards extending patentability to business methods, algorithms
or mathematical methods, as is the case in the US.
Labour MEPs are not voting to introduce software patents but to limit
patents."
There was a documentary on BBC Radio 4 last night discussing software patents. It didn't really touch upon the current shenanigans in Brussels and there was nothing new for those of us here who are familiar with the various arguments but I thought it was an interesting straw in the wind - the issue appears to be creeping up the news agenda a bit.
Anyone interested can get an audio stream of the programme from the BBC's listen again website for the next few days. The strand was 'In Business' and the patent programme will be available up until the next episode in the strand is broadcast (Wed or Thurs I think).
Regards
Luke
#include witty_one_liner.h
They're quite right, *scanf can also be fairly horrendous. Although the fact you're implementing the C library means you've put the neccessary mechanisms in place when writing the buffered I/O routines, and, using the least effort/more resources approach, only have to deal with the buffer case.
FreeBSD works fine. I think you're confused and you mean Debian.
--> http://thankpoland.info/
From the patent description:
This isn't about digital storage, but rather analog storage. Poulsen apparently didn't consider representing audio (or any other kind of information) as discrete digits (in binary or any other base), which would be required for a digital system.However, I think Joseph Jacquard deserves mention for his use of "punched cards" to store instructions for an automatic weaving loom, 200 years ago. Actually, even the written alphabet, which evolved out of arbitrary pictograms into a finite set of symbols several thousand years ago, could be described as a method for digital information storage, as the semantics of a written word normally doesn't change with the exact visual appearance of each glyph. I wonder if King Hammurabi ever awarded someone a patent on writing?
As certain European countries are constitutional monarchies, where the head of state isn't elected but descends from a royal lineage, having them jointly appoint the Commission certainly wouldn't be democratic. To be precise, the Commission as a whole is actually approved by the EU parliament, and individual commissioners are nominated by their respective governments, which may or may not in turn be influenced by the position of their heads of state, depending on their national constitutions.
Other than that, you are quite correct. Even if there is a considerable democratic "distance" between the Commission and the voters of Europe, it ultimately does derive its power from duly elected representatives, either in national governments or (to a lesser extent) in the European parliament.
Please support our effort to block EU software patents by signing this "Thank You, Poland" letter which will be sent to the proper Polish authorities.
Optionally, you can also indicate your country of citizenship, and/or add a personal message to Wlodzimierz Marcinski, Poland's Undersecretary of State at the Ministry of Science and Information Technology, who spoke out at the EU Council meeting to prevent the software patents disaster.
I take back every single Polack (sp?) joke I ever told when I was a kid...
IANAL... But I play one on
The pointer to the fish seems especially silly as there is a more up-to-date version of this article in the english version of Heise news.
It seems that the right time has come to deliver the Thank Poland letter with all the signatures which have been confirmed so far; right now the most likely date appears to be Thursday this week (January 27). I plan to fly to Warsaw for this, and we'll try to get some significant media coverage. If you think you might be able to help with this, please drop me an email at nb@norbert.ch
Under construction: swpat politics overview article
More important than fighting software patents (but related), is fighting trusted computing...
The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
Right, hit on the monopoly angle.
Besides, who wants stuff that is oh so 20 years-ago. We want modern stuff.
Imagine what it would be like if you invented vulcanization one year after Goodyear rolled out the first tire? You'd have to wait for almost two whole decades to start selling tires unless you came up with another brilliant idea in the garage. How are you going to feed a family when you're puttering around in the garage? Now imagine that thousands of other people also invented vulcanization after reading about it in Popular Science two weeks before you? Then you'd really be out of luck. Well, that's just how it is with software. Thousands of frustrated tire makers.
Can please anyone explain to me, how agriculture and ... fishery... relates to software patents?
It reminds me a phrase "[expert,] like pig in oranges", and some unpleasant situations, when cowboys were trying to rule the country...