Slashdot Mirror
Software Patents Could Stop EU Linux Development
sebFlyte writes "An expert in computer and Internet law has advised that if the CIID is passed in europe (which looks likely but is not certain) then the threat of patent litigation could bring European Linux development to a grinding halt." From the article: "There is no question that some of the open source software that is out there -- such as the Linux kernel itself -- has got patent violations in there. That is acknowledged. There is more danger that those potential violations will be litigated..."
Trademarks work that way. Patents can be used to sue people no matter how long they may have violated it with or without the knowledge of patent holder. and IANAL
So, they are knowingly violating patents and don't like legislation that might help companies uphold suits against those known violations? Seems like they just shouldn't have violated those patents in the first place.
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
Actually, there's not a shred of evidence that Linux has any patented code in it. What has been agreed is that the current development model wouldn't stop such code entering the kernel. This is not the same as saying that this has already happened.
If it had, SCO would likely have presented this as evidence of potential violations as part of its case. That it has yet to present a single example, either of a violation of their own patents/IP or even a violation of someone else's, is strong evidence no such violation has actually occured.
The closest I can recall was an uncredited piece of network code that fell under the BSD license. That violated the author's copyright - not patent, just copyright - but was resolved. Oh, and some jerk tried to trademark the word "Linux" for an OS, suing Linus and a whole bunch of distros for trademark infringement. The thing was settled out of court, IIRC, with the a*hole actually getting his money back for the trademark filing. (That's like a convicted blackmailer demanding the victim reimburse them for the cost of postage.) The other terms of the settlement were sealed.
Linux uses stuff donated by SGI and IBM, but that code has been clensed of any IP. Both companies went through a lengthy - and impressively transparent - process to really illustrate just how clean the code was. The only stuff that's even remotely suspect is the NUMA code, but since that was one of the prime targets for SCO, you can be certain it has been gone over with a fine tooth-comb by patent lawyers and coders on both sides of the fence. Nothing has been found, because there's nothing there to find.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
There are thousands upon thousands of software patents in Europe right now. Various countries' patent offices have been granting them for years, despite the fact that they cannot be enforced.
One of the more disturbing things about this patent legislation moving forward in the EU is that these will be grandfathered in and will come into full force once patents are allowed. I can't even imagine the feeding frenzy which will happen at that point, and frankly I wonder if these people have really thought it through at all. It almost certainly will cripple the software industry in Europe for years, if not permanently.
Only if you sue Adobe. There is no automatic lawsuits for patent infringement, you actually have to make the effort to file the lawsuit yourself.
Would you have a case (again, theorically if you did have that patent BEFORE Photoshop was released)? My guess is yes, and Adobe would have to pay. Here's the problem: They have lawyers and money to back them, you most likely, do not. Just like Gimp.org.
This is why patents (at least the broad generalization type patents for software) simply suck. Patent one-click purchasing? Come on.
Patents on software is like patents for books. What if there was a patent for "medieval fantasy" before Tolkien wrote The Hobbit? It would suck for him would'nt it? I guess the question is: Is software more like hardware, that it does a function--or is it art? or Science?
Threats of patents hasn't seemed to slow US Linux development, so why would it have any affect on EU Linux development?
Because there's not much financial incentive to sue Linux developers at this stage. The purpose of any lawsuit against Linux or any other Open Source project will be able controlling your competition.
Like I mentioned in another post, Open Source projects ARE being stalked by their commercial counterparts at the moment, but they are very reluctant to attempt these lawsuits when the largest economy in the world (The EU) is currently a safe-haven for software patents.
If they sue now, they risk scaring off the EU and controlling the IP rights in the EU.
Trust me. The threat is definitely looming.
In California, at least, if a city or some local government post a speed limit sign that says 10 MPH on an interstate freeway (for example), you don't have to follow it because the speed sign is not "reasonable" from an engineer/public safety perspective. All speed limit signs MUST be backed by engineering studies that says the proper speed limits should be set at x MPH for this stretch of road. If you get a ticket for speeding, and in court you demand the prosecutor providing engineering studies proof to back-up the vailidity of the speed limit, and they cannot, your case is then dismissed and you are free.
Therefore, even if the law is passed, it doesn't mean you should follow it blindly.
On another tangent, if the traffic is going 80 MPH, and you go 70 MPH on a 60 MPH highway it was possible to get a ticket for going too fast and too slow at the same time. Though usually the court will throw out one of the two.
Excuse me??? Microsoft took out a patent on sudo. Yes, I realize that this patent should have been shot at the gate, but right now sudo violates a patent that was probably written by somebody who was in diapers when sudo was first written.
The fact that a patent is absolutely assinine and should never have been granted may lessen, but does not remove it's chilling effect on Linux development. That's part of why it's so important to leash (if not put down) the software patent industry.
Sometimes boldness is in fashion. Sometimes only the brave will be bold.
That depends. Which SCO-thing?
SCO vs IBM -- It's about contract issues, not copyrights. That was evident long ago.
SCO vs IBM counterclaims -- IBM wants a declatory judgement that they are not violating SCO's copyrights.
SCO vs Novell -- It's about who owns the code. Or, more precisely, is Novell making knowingly false claims when they say they own the code.
SCO vs Daimler Chrysler -- It's about timely responding to SCO's demand and whether SCO's demand was too broad given the contract involved.
SCO vs AutoZone -- SCO claims AutoZone is violating their copyrights.
Red Hat vs SCO -- Seeks a declatory judgement that they are not violating SCO's copyrights.
sudo has nothing to do with Linux. When we're talking about Linux here we're talking about the operating system Kernel. Technically it's wrong to refer to the Linux operating system, especially if you're a Gnu / Stallman fan. But even if you're not, one thing is clear... sudo is not a part of Linux.
Fedora/RedHat lacks mp3 and divx/mpeg/etc playback because of patent issues. Mandrake (France) and SuSe (Germany) ship with a lot better multimedia experience. WPA (802.11x) is another patented like hell tech, so don't hold your breath for a smooth out-of-box wireless support on RedHat either.
As more patents are filed all the time and old ones get enforced, the Linux experience will get dampened even more.
While the western tech media has blamed Chinas relucancy to adopt 802.11x on their jingoism, It is more likely that China doesn't think that RAND terms of those patents are that Reasonable and Non-discriminatory after all..
signatures pending - ansa@kos.to - (dont mail there)
You're missing the point. Yes, they are alleged until proven in court. But they can be proven in court because the FACTS favor the patent-holder.
It's like if I had a patent to breathing. I could sue someone for breathing without a license. Yes, technically, they would be ALLEGEDLY breathing without a license, but that's academic. If they're alive, they're breathing. In much the same way that if a piece of software does anything useful, it infringes a patent.
The point is not whether or not the infringement happened. It did. Allegedly yes, but it's perfectly easy to prove. Microsoft has a patent on "sudo". Linux uses "sudo" without a license from Microsoft. Ergo, Linux infringes Microsoft's patent. You can say "allegedly" all you want, but the infringement is there in the open for everyone and the courts to see.
But the patent for "sudo" isn't valid. There's prior art (like Linux's use of sudo, for example). So some Linux company spends a few hundred grand and now that legal threat is neutralized. Only fifty thousand more to go, or until the Linux companies run out of money, whichever comes first. Which is the whole point.
"On another tangent, if the traffic is going 80 MPH, and you go 70 MPH on a 60 MPH highway it was possible to get a ticket for going too fast and too slow at the same time. Though usually the court will throw out one of the two."
Show me ONE example where this has happened. Laws cannot be interpreted in such a manner that it is impossible to act lawfully. If you go and read the relevant traffic laws, you will find that under no circumstances can the "prevailing speed" be considered to be greater than the posted speed limit.
You're correct that I mistakenly was talking about copyright.
On the patent matter- if BSD is in infringement, likely so are MacOs, Windows, and various other pieces of software.
It's, as they say, a fishing expedition.
BTW - wish you hadn't posted AC - I'd have friended you immediately. This is great stuff
cut-n-paste job for the lazy:
Church of Scientology Legal threats against this web page