Software Patents In The European Union Continued...

Christopher Reimer writes "O'Reilly Policy DevCenter has a nice overview concerning the legalizing software patents in the European Union. From the article: 'The Computer Implemented Inventions Directive (CIID), which seeks to clarify the issue, is still being fought over in the EU and may or may not result in legalizing them. For small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and in particular, free software projects, there is much to lose.'"

Comments

Lights, Camera, Inaction

[Stanistani]

Would like to hear from any European Slashdotters who have actually written to or phoned or emailed their elected representatives on this noxious attempt to hobble innovation.

Any response from your public "servants?"

Re:Lights, Camera, Inaction

[lordsilence]

We've tried talking to our politicians in sweden, they are either too unknowing about these topics or just dont care.

Touchy topic, but many swedish citizens want to leave the EU.

Re:Lights, Camera, Inaction

[hazee]

Yeah, I wrote to the 6 MEPs that represent my region (Yorkshire and Humberside). They include 2 Labour MEPs (Richard Corbett and Linda McAvan), 2 Conservative MEPs (Edward McMillan Scott and Timothy Kirkhope), a Liberal Democrat (Diana Wallis) and an member of the UK Independance Party (Godfrey Bloom).

That was on the 1st of March. So far, I have had exactly 1 response, from Edward McMillan Scott, and that consisted of a standard form letter, indicating that the Conservatives were *for* the proposed Directive on Computer Implemented Inventions, because it would "offer [the patent office] secure legal grounds for refusing a patent for an invention involving pure software".

The letter ended up by stating that the European Parliament had voted to restart the process, indicating that he (or more likely the secratary who selected the form letter response) hadn't actually read my letter, which was to protest about this vote to restart being ignored by the Commission, as reported on Slashdot.

To date, I haven't received so much as a "thank you for your letter" from any of the others.

This was the first time I have ever been motivated enough to write to my representatives. Considering the complete lack of a response, it may be the last.

I can see now why direct action is so appealing to so many these days. It's the only way to get anything done.

Re:Lights, Camera, Inaction

[realkiwi]

Yes. I wrote to the French MEP who is on employment and international trade comitees and who is my political color.

In reply I was forwarded a press statement that says

1. It isn't over _we_ haven't decided.
2. What is with the notion that the process is undemocratic. We the parliment decide and everything that has gone before is normal procedure.
3. Patents can only be applied to software that is part of hardware. Business logic can not be patented.

NOTE this is my reading of a press statement in French and in politician language.

Now I bet that it will take a lot longer than those trying to push patents on everything under the sun would like. And I hope that in the end basic programming ideas and business logic will not be covered by patents in Europe as this political group says in its PR.

The Kzinti solution seems applicable here

[KlomDark]

"Incredible," said the kzin. "If the Patriarchy tried to force such a law on kzinti, we would exterminate the Patriarchy for its insolence."
- Ringworld (Larry Niven)

What the hell

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally I think the Europeans who are pushing software patents are being really dumb. Are they even Europeans? Don't they realize that if they establish software patents, that all the prior patents established in the U.S. will override the patents in the EU, and U.S. Corps will be able to extend their power over the EU?

If this isn't the case, how are the people who patent stuff in the EU that's already been patented in the U.S. going to have a leg to stand on?

I'd be really interested to know if the people pushing for software patents had any connections with U.S. based corporations... I smell somethin fishy...

See this from another angle

[ajs318]

If the directive is approved, it will make it clear that any software patent granted up until now was unlawful and is therefore null and void. This will mean that patent holders will be forced to re-apply for their patents as soon as the directive is made law!

Meanwhile, anything that would have violated one of the unlawful patents is now legitimate prior art for blocking the re-application.

Re:See this from another angle

[MadMoses]

If the directive is approved, it will make it clear that any software patent granted up until now was unlawful and is therefore null and void. This will mean that patent holders will be forced to re-apply for their patents as soon as the directive is made law!

You are so wrong.

Software patents are not legal in the EU under current laws. But we already have about 30.000 software patents here. Nobody cares (well, those who are against software patents complain, but nobody in power cares). The patent office just continues granting those patents.

And you think that if they now pass a law that would allow software patents, that would render them null and void? No, all those patents will remain, because then, they will be actually unprohibited and retroactively made valid.

Re:Do we really want to get rid of software patent

[Xylaan]

Having said that, I see that most people on slashdot want to get rid of software patents, but what I'm wondering is, why only software?

I believe that the problem is not software vs. non-software patents, but the general quailty of software patents vs. the quality of non-software patents. It's not that software shouldn't be patentable, but that a great deal of the worst offenders are not patents on specific inventions, but entire ideas. In some cases, they're patenting the problem, instead of the solution.

One example is from the FFII wewbsite: A patent on trapping viruses. After a brief glance through the description and the abstract, it seems reasonable. Except when we look at the claims, this patent attempts to claim all virtual environments used to capture viruses. If you were asked to implement this 'invention', the patent wouldn't help much, as the difficulty of the implmentation is in figuring out how to make it work, and this patent is more of an overall design.

Examples could be given for good and not-to-broad software patents, but the general feeling is SW patents are usually too broad and too easily infringed. While not allowing any SW patents might be a bit extreme, but it's better than letting them in now and letting them to cause further harm to the software industry.

Re:Leave the EU

[nickco3]

Preventing the directive going ahead now is probably impossible.

I disagree. The European Parliament is a relatively young institution that has recently begun flexing it's muscles against the Commission. Last October all the different nations and all the different political parties came together and successfully blocked Rocco Buttiglione's nomination as Justice Commissioner, even though the Parliament technically doesn't have that power.

The Parliament as an institution is showing an interest in extending it's authority, and has so far had it's views on this directive ignored. It's possible that the Parliament could shoot it down out of pure bloody-minded, turf-war politics.