Slashdot Mirror


EU Software Patent War Ignites Again

pieterh writes "ZDNet UK has a detailed article on the heating-up of the software patent debate in Europe. A new motion before the European Parliament calls for a harmonised patent court (EPLA) that would be able to enforce software patents across Europe. This comes just 15 months after the EP rejected the infamous Computer Implemented Inventions directive." From the article: "Patents on software are formally disallowed under the European patent system, but are routinely granted by the European patent office, according to critics. They are currently difficult to enforce in many EU member states, something critics say would be changed by the failed software patent directive, and now by the EPLA. Software patents are generally considered to add to the legal costs of large enterprises, as well as creating a hostile legal environment for smaller software businesses and open source projects."

10 of 168 comments (clear)

  1. the best solution, obviously by User+956 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ZDNet UK has a detailed article on the heating-up of the software patent debate in Europe. A new motion before the European Parliament calls for a harmonised patent court (EPLA) that would be able to enforce software patents across Europe.

    Yes, because clearly the best solution isn't to simply fix the law, but to create an entirely new governmental bureacracy.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    1. Re:the best solution, obviously by Qzukk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      the best solution isn't to simply fix the law

      The law is fixed. The law specifically disallows software patents. The "infamous" directive mentioned in the writeup failed, so the law still specifically disallows software patents. The patent office issues them anyway. Isn't it funny how laws telling people what to do result in fines, jail time, and execution if you break them, but laws telling the government what to do have absolutely no punishment when the government breaks them?

      So to enforce the patents, whoever is behind this clusterfuck intends to create an entirely new court system, specifically for the purpose of "legislating from the bench".

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  2. Sad, isn't it ? by mickwd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the article:

    In rebuttal, the three groups have filed a motion calling for "balance between the interests of patent holders and the broader public interest in innovation and competitive markets"

    Sad, isn't it, when the groups opposing this are calling for a "balance" between patent holders and the greater public good.

    Surely, the whole point of patents was "the broader public interest in innovation and competitive markets" ?

    So how can McCreevy and co. get away with opposing "the broader public interest in innovation and competitive markets", the will of our elected EU politicians, and the wishes of by far the majority of the population who have expressed an interest in the matter ?

  3. Why SMALL businesses reject software patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The enormous cost (3million EUROS) of litigating any patent dispute means small businesses simply cannot benefit from having patents when a large company infringes their patents . We absolutely do not want software patents because they are harmful to innovation in our own businesses. Indeed, we demand any attempt to introduce them in Europe is completely rejected. Two years ago, over 200,000 small businesses in Europe signed a petition to the European Commission totally rejecting the idea of introducing software patents in Europe, and totally rejecting the idea of harmonising legal processes in a way that might support software patents.

    1. Re:Why SMALL businesses reject software patents by Anomalyst · · Score: 3, Insightful
      copyright laws aren't sufficient to protect software inventions
      Sorry, I have been coding for over thirty years there is NO "invention" taking place in that process any more than a plumbers or carpenters solution to a tricky bathroom remodeling around a basement support pole is patentable. Solving these issues can be done by any competent practitioner, similar coding would be created by a majority of the programming community given a correctly defined problem. I.E. what we do is OBVIOUS and NOT patentable.
      Despite the ignorant opinion of a Judge, there is nothing patentable in any piece of code in and of itself. If the USPTO had a history of correctly, consistantly and properly doing their job, I might concede that its possible that when software is intimately embedded in a physical device that such a device in its entirety might be patentable, but it would have to be something non-obvious and provably absent of prior art, and not just "with a computer" or "over the internet" of some other solution. We in the US are already inundated with big business garbage sliding down THAT slippery slope and software patents have proven to be a decision whose negatives far outweigh the positives.
      --
      There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
  4. Welcome to Democracy by ClamIAm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think it's safe to say most Slashdotters prefer a form of government where they have a voice, and this probably means most of us favor some form of liberal democracy. Well, Wendell Philips said it best when he described the price of liberty as "eternal vigilance". There will always be forces in the world trying to subvert liberty to serve their own ends, and this means that there must always be people who will stand up for what is right.

    I realize this is kind of a sappy/idealistic post, but, um, I think there's some measure of truth here.

    1. Re:Welcome to Democracy by Shawn+is+an+Asshole · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can't for the life of me figure out what makes people hate software patents more than other types of patents...

      For one thing, software already has copyright. Why does it also need patents?

      Say I write a song with a I-IV-V progression. I have copyright on that song now. Should I also be able to patent the I-IV-V progression and begin suing everyone over it?

      --
      "It ain't a war against drugs.it's a war against personal freedom" --Bill Hicks
    2. Re:Welcome to Democracy by KwKSilver · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actaually, your arguments in this thread--taken at face value--make a powerful case to outlaw all patents. Thanks.

      --
      If you want your life to be different, live it differently.
  5. Re:international issues by Burz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For example, if patent office A says that something is obvious, but patent office B in another nation claims that it isn't

    The answer is you sign a "free-trade" treaty to "synchronize" your "intellectual property" laws with the United States. Then you just do whatever the Americans tell you.

  6. Eh,,, by Barts_706 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Once in my life I felt proud to be Polish - it was when we blocked the issue of software patents.

    It looks like we have won the battle, but the war will continue as long as there is overload of bureacracy in EU and moloch corporations to be lobbying.

    Personally, being a Linux user (perhaps not the most advanced around, but at least trying) I shiver at the tought of software patents being introduced and what effect this might have on our distributions. No left-click, no double-click, no <insert_your_favourite_nix_feature_here>?

    I do hope this issue will be bounced back again. For the sake of us all.