Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

EU Says No To Software Patents

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the break-out-the-champagne dept.

Moggie68 writes "European parliament has . struck down the proposal for a directive that would have brought US-style software patents into EU." Here's another story on the decision.

7 of 525 comments (clear)

  1. Well done!! by seti · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Congratulations to the FFII for all their hard work and patience campaigning against the directive!!! These people deserve all the support they can get.

    For the time being I can rest assured that working as a programmer I do not have to watch my every statement.

    --
    Coca-Cola, sometimes War.
  2. Re:Victory by N3WBI3 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    This is not just a victory for opensource. Companies will have more room to reverse engineer software. This will also benefit closed source companies! everyone wins.

    Personally my only problem with software patents is the length. I think that an 18-36 month patent is reasonable but anything over that is not.

    --
  3. Re:Historic day for Europe! by PintoPiman · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Today we're a bit closer to freedom :)

    Not to rain on the parade or anything, but aren't we exactly as close as before? I mean it's still exciting that we aren't further from freedom than yesterday...

    ~p

  4. Re:Victory! by neillewis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, I would urge caution in seeing this as a victory for the anti-patent side. It is clear that the pro-patent side was willing to see this bill killed off rather that have the FFII's amendments voted into law.

    The patent lobbyists will be back, if not in the EU then in every national parliament. Congratulations to the FFII, in stopping this and putting the spotlight on the software patent issue. It's a huge achievement.But this is only the first battle.

    It's worth a lot of money to Microsoft and front organisations like the BSA to shut down competition using patents, hopefully with the issue now more widely known they will find it increasingly difficult to spread lies and buy off politicians.

  5. Gray area getting slightly whiter though by file-exists-p · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The EPO (European Patent Office) has granted patents on algorithms for years, despite the fact that they are illegal under the current European legislation. And it seems that the fight will go on there (cf. this article).

    However, considering today's vote, the patent offices can not anymore claim that their interpretation of the law have a political backup.

    --
    Go Debian!
  6. Looks like we DOSsed this bill out of existence by Mirk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here is the slightly worrying meat of the matter (from TFA):

    Some 178 amendments to the bill were tabled by lawmakers before the vote. In the end parliament decided to vote down the law, fearing the amendments would dilute it and make it an inadequate compromise. "It was a mess. Better no directive than a bad directive," said Tony Robinson, spokesman for the Socialists. EICTA, a group representing 10,000 companies including giants such as Nokia and Alcatel SA which had been lobbying for the bill, said the decision to scrap it was wise, given the large number of amendments that threatened to severely narrow the scope of the legislation.

    So it seems that the bill was not voted down because the anti-SWPAT people were able to persuade the voters of the rightness of their cause, but that it was spammed with amendments until it collapsed under its own weight.

    Still a good thing, of course, but it would have been nicer to have this stupid idea explicitly faced down.

    --

    --
    What short sigs we have -
    One hundred and twenty chars!
    Too short for haiku.
  7. Re:It's possible that certain types of patents are by listen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You clearly have no idea what mathematics is.

    Do you think that all of maths is simple arithmetic? I hope you realise that apply is a mathematical operator : this is what you would refer to as "calling a method". Defining a function is an equation. Do I really have to spell it out for you? Everything in your programs is mathematical. Not necessarily arithmetical. Please learn the difference.

    Practically all programming language semantic research is couched in the terms of category or set theory. That you don't know this doesn't mean it isn't so. Look it up if you have more than a passing interest in your career.

    When a patent claims something like the "method of drag and drop", it is claiming that all possible symbolic forms that implement this method are infringing. These forms, like every program you have ever written, are mathematical. The big issue is that the form is not being claimed as in a copyrighted work or a physical patent: it is the very concept of solving the problem that is being claimed. Once you have spotted a problem, you immediately control all possible solutions.