Slashdot Mirror


European Parliament Rejects Software Patents

heretic9 writes "The European Parliament unanimously rejected the software patent bill recently put before it. Hugo Lueders of CompTIA, a pro-patent lobby group, said that the benefits of the bill had been obscured by special interest groups, which muddied debate about the rights and wrongs of software patents." Meaning, essentially, that the Conference of Presidents got its way.

16 of 357 comments (clear)

  1. The Europeans Get It Right, Again by the_mad_poster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Another example of the far more sensible approach our friends across the pond take to things. Even though the majority of people are citizens, not corporations, we only value the corporations when it comes time to protect "people" over here in america because they have the majority of money.

    --
    Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    1. Re:The Europeans Get It Right, Again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But those same people aren't held responsible when the corporation harms someone or breaks the law. Limited liability gives investors all of the freedom and none of the responsibility that would normally go with a free market.

    2. Re:The Europeans Get It Right, Again by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The problem is that coporations pay taxes. As such, this entitles them to those rights.

      Ah, no, whether or not a not-real legally-defined entity like a corporation pays taxes is pretty much irrelevant to whether the government considers corporations people. The problem is the Supreme Court decisions giving corporations "personhood". See this link for an interesting little essay on how the Supreme Court managed to "create" corporate personhood.

      They (the SC) may have successfully tied the concept of corporate personhood to enough precedents to make it "Constitutional", which means that the legislatures would have to pass a Constitutional Amendment to explicitly "undefine" corporate personhood. Of course, given corporate lobbying power, what do you think the chances of THAT happening is?

      Actually, a Constitutional Amendment to restrict personhood to real-life individuals makes a _lot_ more sense to me than a stupid amendment to define marriage as "between one man and one woman". Hey, if corporations have personhood, can you marry a corporation?

    3. Re:The Europeans Get It Right, Again by David+Leppik · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Thats just the thing. Corporations are legally entitled to all the rights of people. That is what makes them so powerful.


      (Disclaimer: IANAL.)



      That's not entirely true. Corporations have the right to enter into contracts as people. They like to pretend to have other rights, such as freedom of speech. As I understand it, the NRA tried to get a radio station last year to bypass restrictions on their speech-- that is, the tried to join the constitutionally protected press.



      Despite the corporate personhood implied by Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad (1886), corporations have not been allowed to vote or excercize similar rights.



      If you honestly believe that corporations have all the rights of a person, try to get married to a corporate entity. If Starbucks spurns you, try a non-profit entity such as the ACLU.


    4. Re:The Europeans Get It Right, Again by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Corporations aren't mindless automatons, they're groups of people who've agreed through their charter to share financial responsibility. If a crime is being committed it's not by a corporation, it's by a subset of the people in the corporation.

      As far as what you say goes, this is true. However, let's say that you and 3 other people all give Harry $200 each, and say that you expect $250 each back after a specified time, as long as he handles the money the way you want him to. You then tell Harry that you've all decided together (with you personally being a bit unsure about this, but the other two overruled you) that you'll pull your money out unless he gets your interest money very soon, and if you don't see that he has a gun and a mask in his posession within 3 hours, you'll pull out your money immediately.

      You see, although a lot of people look on the stock exchange purely as a way to grow their money, investing in a company involves becoming part of the group that decides how that company is run. The Board is responsable to the shareholders, and the employees are responsable to the Board. The Corporation is made up of the shareholders and the Board, and they hire employees. It is ultimately the shareholders as a body who are responsable for what happens in a company. If the Board does something against the wishes of the shareholders, the Board bears full responsability for those actions. If the employees do something against the wishes of the Board, those employees bear responsability for those actions. Thus, just as parents (the corporation) are responsable for the actions of their children, investors are responsable for the actions of the corporation -- and the individuals are also responsable for their individual actions.

  2. It is not over yet... by Synli · · Score: 3, Insightful

    From the article: "The latest rejection means that now the bill on computer inventions must go back to the EU for re-consideration."

    --
    "Two things inspire me to awe -- the starry heavens above and the moral universe within." - Albert Einstein
  3. Double standard by CaptainAlbert · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, when he writes to lawmakers asking them to consider his point of view, it's called "lobbying".

    How come when I do it, it's called "muddying debate"?

    Sheesh...

    --
    These sigs are more interesting tha
  4. Re:1-0 by Anita+Coney · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They will only give up when software patents are legal. This is going to be a LONG fight.

    And I just don't get why Europe would EVER legalize software patents. Right now they are legal in Australia, India, the US, and Japan. So basically, right not, Europe is the only place in the industrialized world which can do something simple like include a help icon in its software.

    Without software patents, Europe will become a Mecca of software development!

    --
    If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
  5. Oh, The Horror by CastrTroy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    a pro-patent lobby group, said that the benefits of the bill had been obscured by special interest groups, which muddied debate about the rights and wrongs of software patents

    How dare they discuss the bad points about software patents. Isn't the pro-patent lobby group a special interest group? What makes them think they have a right to present their views, while groups which are against software patents do not?

    --

    Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  6. Re:Constitution by iapetus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Software patents as implemented in the US do not promote the progress of science and useful arts, and are therefore not covered by this.

    --
    ++ Say to Elrond "Hello.".
    Elrond says "No.". Elrond gives you some lunch.
  7. Re:Constitution by johannesg · · Score: 4, Insightful
    My right to patent my idea is granted to me by the Constitution.

    Maybe, but not in Europe. Your laws end where your borders end. Outside the US, your constitution has about as much value as a sheet of toilet paper.

  8. Re:Constitution by RWerp · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As the Patriot act shows, inside the U.S. the U.S. constitution can be treated like a sheet of toilet paper, too.

    --
    "Long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead." (John Maynard Keynes)
  9. A new patent bill is needed by erik_norgaard · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is a clear requirement that the current patent laws in EU be cleared up! It is quite obscure and vague on some points and this has actually allowed for software patents to get through, just check the iiff.org website.

    The discussion is not whether new and uniform patent legislation accross EU is needed. It is about the content.

    The pros want EU to align with USA, in many other areas, aligning laws with important trade partners is beneficial for all parties. But with the development in USA in this case, the benefits of such alignment can be disputed.

    Unfortunately the continual rejections and attempts to force through a particular piece of paper has now become a dispute about democracy and who has the power - attention seems to be shifted away from the original content.

    I am looking forward for the process to restart so the discussion can get back on track.

  10. Re:I Love How Many US Folk Still Don't Get The EU. by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah sure. It is not a troll just a different opinion. You should obviously read about how to make a difference between something you DO NOT agree with and something that has been created for the purpose to stir controversy. I have to conclude that it was rather the former.

    First, GP is correct imo. There are signs, which would be too numerous to detail here, indicating that the USA is behaving as an empire, not as a nation. In a democratic way the USA wouldn't ignore international laws and customs just because noone is in the place to punish them for doing so. If you would examine your economics textbooks a bit more in-depth, you would realise that Japan beat the US economy on a lot of points, pushed the usa out of a lot of markets in the 80ies. It needs a bit longer explanation. After WW2 USA administration assumed that the soviets are 20 years behind technologically at the time. They were proven wrong by the A-bomb two years after, the hydrogen-bomb and sputnik and Gagarin. The administration had a panic reaction and realised that they need to improve the education in the states drastically, which happened in the 60ies (i'm thinking about bleeding edge science here, so universities and laboratories mainly). They pushed a TON of money into the education system and into so called "base or basic research". They came up with a lot of progress and inventions, and the electronical industry LIVES from those inventiones UP UNTIL TODAY. The USA, however stopped these researches because of the economic changes, think of oil crisis, etc. This gave place for Japan in the 80ies to grab markets, because although japan didnt run any base research, they improved the technology they bought from the USA, so that's why it had a big impact on US economy. I have to note that most of these info is from a course i'm attending now and the reasoning i presented is from my teacher specialized in this subject

    I'm not saying that something similar is going on with the EU atm, just that there are consequences if someone ruins the education system and that the USA seems to make bad decisions when messing with the economy.

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
  11. Re:I Love How Many US Folk Still Don't Get The EU. by hey! · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Well, people will start to care when it affects their job prospects.


    "I'm going to get a job in manufacturing."

    Nope. Those have gone to South China.

    "OK, then I'll get a job that requires advanced education, like engineering."

    India.

    "Well, I'll get a job in an industry that has advantages from running in the world's largest first world economy."

    I'll see you in Brussels, then, because that'd be the EU.

    We're pretty much running along on the momentum of our past accomplishments here, although that momentum is considerable and should carry us for a decade or so before the decline becomes undeniable and the inevitable bickering about whose fault it is kicks in. The very idea of globalization is that countries do what they are undeniably best at. What is the US these days better at than any other country?

    That'd be spending money.

    So become an invetment banker, young man, and specialize in investing the accumulated wealth of two hundred years of domestic economic accomplishment overseas. Or if that career path is not open to you, there is always retail.

    There is no will to chart out a brighter course for the people who make their living by creating things or performing services. If you doubt this, look at education reform. Oh, I have no objection to "No Child Left Behind", other than its utter lack of boldness. I was born on the tail edge of the baby boom, so I know what serious, shitting-your-pants-because-of-sputnik education reform looks like, and that ain't it.

    Software patents are just another example of something that is good for capital but bad for people who create (although ostensibly it is for their benefit!). As innovation grinds to a halt because of legal uncertainty, companies can continue to exploit their past innovations without creating any new ones. For Joe Engineer, his job security is only good as his next innovation. His part ones are signed over to the company.
    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  12. Re:Corporate personhood the root of all evil by giampy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well both organizations deal with power, since money is today the most effective representation of power, while religion and access-to-gods has been "the" power for a long time.

    One thing that people/organizations in power do, is try to get even some more power, which helps in getting even more power later on, which at the end destablizes the social system in one way or another.

    In fact, concentration of power into too few hands is the single most important reason why manysocial systems collaped in the past. Examples are everywhere. From the roman empire to the middle aged church-state, form the indian 4000 old castes-based system, (in which not surprisingly the priests become the dominant caste), to even the soviet so called "social" system ...

    We as humans need to learn from hour history and enforce very strict rules that limit power accumulation, in all its incarnations.

    --
    We learn from history that we learn nothing from history - Tom Veneziano