Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Patents

Germany to Vote Against Software Patents in the EU 617

Posted by michael from the just-say-no dept.
YKW writes "According to Ars Technica, Germany has decided to vote against all changes to current European patent laws. In a statement given to demonstrators in Germany, Federal Department of Justice Minsterial Director Elmar Hucko read the riot act to the EC: 'Under no circumstances do we want American procedures in Europe, Hucko vowed with regard to the US patent process. A patent must be "a fair reward for a bona fide invention and not abused as a strategy to bludgeon competitors.' With the largest EU member against software patents and French IT leaders lobbying their goverment to vote against them too, Europe might be saved from software patents. At least for a while. An older Slashdot article about software patents in Europe is here."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Germany to Vote Against Software Patents in the EU More

Germany to Vote Against Software Patents in the EU

Comments Filter:

  • Foreign competitors (Score:5, Interesting)

    by kevmo ( 243736 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:09AM (#9165326)
    I am curious to see how this will play out with big US companies like Microsoft and Apple, specifically with foreign competitors cloning their products.

    Will Microsoft be able to prevent Windows clones from being sold in the US by US patents, even though they may be legal in Europe?

    • Re:Foreign competitors (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Awptimus Prime ( 695459 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:40AM (#9165422)
      I think I know what is going to happen:

      Eventually, the EU is going to stomp all over US software firms. This will happen after a few years of unrestricted development.

      If this pans out well, I'll be looking for citizenship in the EU in the next few years. What's so great about the US nowadays? We've demonstrated that our voting system has failed, that our leadership hates gays, muslims, and does nothing to protect middle america's jobs while all the fatcats get fatter by outsourcing anything and everything they can because they lost their sense of nationalism over a few dollars.

      The way I see it, the US has had leadership without any real vision of tomorrow. This has resulted in a world of nations against it. The repair will require a lot more than a democrat in office, too. It will require people actually caring, and that is not going to happen anytime soon. Hell, look how well 9/11 "brought us together". All it brought together were the straight, old white people out in the boonies, and that's only because they all bought the same stickers, t-shirts, and other random 9/11 merchandise at the local gas station. For the rest of us, all we see is a nation filled with hate and sensless, highly reactionary, law making.

      Geeks, get your passports ready.. EU or bust! :)

      • Re:Foreign competitors (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Roger Keith Barrett ( 712843 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @03:03AM (#9165487)
        No... the problem is that over the Bush years there HAS been a vision of the future.

        And that vision is that the future should be controlled by big corporations with no mediation from the government or anyone else.

      • Re:Foreign competitors (Score:4, Interesting)

        by killjoe ( 766577 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @03:56AM (#9165620)
        Ironically the Bush administration (and republicans in general) hates the germans and the french too. I thought it was very funny when Wes Pruden (an editor of that moonie publication washington times) attempted to insult John Kerry by calling him "french looking".

        I wonder if the Bush administration will apply political pressure on the french and the germans to accept these patents? Charles Krauthammer (another republican editor from US news and world report) once called for parking an US aircraft carrier off the coast of france to intimidate them. It will be interesting to see if something like that happens.

        • Re:Foreign competitors (Score:4, Insightful)

          by d_strand ( 674412 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @04:05AM (#9165638)
          Charles Krauthammer (another republican editor from US news and world report) once called for parking an US aircraft carrier off the coast of france to intimidate them
          Oh dear... I *really* hope he was just joking. Can you imagine the hatred that would create? You think the EU is anti-US today? Just wait and see what happens if your government tries something like that :-)

          And it certainly wouldn't increase the chance of the EU to do Americas bidding, quite the opposite...

        • Re:Foreign competitors (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 16, 2004 @04:18AM (#9165665)
          You want to do what? Park an aircraft carrier just off the coast of the country that invented Exocet [wikipedia.org] ?

          My goodness. That'd certainly be a sight worth seeing! Brief, but worth seeing.

          • Re:Foreign competitors (Score:5, Insightful)

            by orcrist ( 16312 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @08:42AM (#9166315)
            You want to do what? Park an aircraft carrier just off the coast of the country that invented Exocet ?

            My goodness. That'd certainly be a sight worth seeing! Brief, but worth seeing.

            Brief? Sorry, no. I'm not one of those knee-jerk "America will kick your ass!" type of Americans but... no. And to the moderators, no it's not insightful. Interesting? Yes.

            Your link mentions that it managed to heavily damage a frigate. There's a world of difference between a frigate and an aircraft carrier. From my tour of duty on submarines I can tell you that a frigate of that sort is considered to be a one-torpedo target; one torpedo will literally crack a frigate right in half. Battleships and aircraft carriers nominally need at least 2-3. And that's assuming you even get in range: 65 km? ROFLMAO.

            An aircraft carrier is never alone. It is almost always accompanied by at least 2 attack subs and several surface ships ranging 150+ km. around the carrier. No surface ship is getting within even 200 km. of that carrier let alone 65 km. And submarines wouldn't have an easy time of it either. At best it would be a suicide mission (since once they fire, they'll have 2 fast-attacks, a swarm of P-3's, and an ASW cruiser on their ass) and they'd be likely to cause more damage if they simply use their torpedos, or better yet ram it at full speed.

            Or, as other posters have pointed out, use nukes. A tomahawk [wikipedia.org] with a tactical nuke and its 1100 km. range would do the trick, assuming the French have them :-P

            Don't get caught up with this idea that just because the U.S. is behaving like a bunch of idiots in Iraq, and that guerilla tactics work against a modern army when it's the occupying force among an increasingly hostile populace that that translates to the ocean. Since the break-up of the USSR there is no one (or not even everyone together) who can challenge the U.S. on the seas. Period. That's why the Navy has turned into nothing more than a troop and munitions delivery service: A victim of its own success.

            -chris

            • Doesn't matter at all. (Score:3, Interesting)

              by incom ( 570967 )
              Since both france and the USA have enough nukes to char broil each other. And since when has talking about going to war against a democratic, peaceful, and nuke bearing western european country been a sane thing to talk about in the USA? It's that kind of humanity risking talk that causes anti-americanism.

        • Re:Foreign competitors (Score:5, Interesting)

          by dbIII ( 701233 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @04:22AM (#9165672)
          I wonder if the Bush administration will apply political pressure on the french and the germans to accept these patents?
          If they do so there will be a repeat of the French reaction to the "vote with us in the UN or face the consequences" demand over Iraq - a firmly extended middle finger. Back then whoever made the demand was either an idiot (maybe it was Rumsfeld?) or it was some deliberately contrived plan to stir up the french so the US could go into Iraq without the UN running the show - because the reaction of the french being threatened like a tiny african republic is exactly what anyone with any awareness of world events would expect.

          If the USA applies pressure on France it will be certain that they vote the other way.

        • Re:Foreign competitors (Score:3, Informative)

          by cpghost ( 719344 )

          once called for parking an US aircraft carrier off the coast of france to intimidate them.

          It would be funny indeed, esp. when they send their Charles de Gaulle [defense.gouv.fr] carrier in vicinity of NYC.

          Just in case you've forgot, France is a nuclear power too. They'll be the last to be intimidated by such bullying.

      • Re:Foreign competitors (Score:5, Insightful)

        by the drizzle ( 724660 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @03:59AM (#9165626)
        Amen. An amendment against gay marriage? This is the pinnacle of our president's social policy? Whatever happened to the great uniter?

        Whether one is for or against the policy of Iraq, the lack of disclosure from this administration is baffling. Any argument one can use against the Clinton administration (lack of disclosure, too much rhetoric) can be multiplied 10x with this administration.

        But more to the point...Europe's economy is proving powerful (and increasingly united) against US policy, and we can either oblige their requests or become victim of their policies. We can force Microsoft to start operating fairly or ignore their practices until their business will be fined into financial hell in Europe and some German company takes over the desktop share (with a Linux/FreeBSD distro).

      • Re:Foreign competitors (Score:5, Insightful)

        by AstroDrabb ( 534369 ) * on Sunday May 16, 2004 @07:52AM (#9166142)
        I agree 100%. I am born and raised in good ole USA, serverd in the USMC and I am not anti-USA. Though I do hope that we get our butts kicked in the IT world by the EU, China and India. Not because I want to lose my job as a programmer of see others lose thier jobs. It is because our Patent system is very broken, and our big businesses are getting far to much political power that a corporation should _never_ have.
        The repair will require a lot more than a democrat in office, too.
        Democrats wont' help, they are just as bad as Republicans. Republicans want big business and Dems want big special interest groups such as unions. Look at these "donations" from the Teamsters Union almost all the money is going to Democrats [opensecrets.org]. Contrast that with big business and almost all the "donations" are going to Republicans [opensecrets.org]. The majority of the top 10 "donars" are giving the majority of thier "donations" to Democrats [opensecrets.org]. We need the USA to get closer to a true democracy with more then two political parties to pick from. It is pretty insane to think that all 300+ million Americans fall into one of two political "buckets". And we also need to make it illegal for a corporation to give bribe money. If you cannot vote, you should not be able to make bribes^H^H^H^H^H^Hcampaign contributions.

        Look at the top 100 "donators" [opensecrets.org] for the period 1998-2004. Just the top 100 have bribed our politicians with $1,156,273,938! You can see why in our "represented" democracy, the average American is not represented. With billions USD going around in bribes, it is hard for even legit politicans to do thier jobs.

        • Mod the Parent UP!

          Campaign Finance Reform should come in the following solutions.

          Only Real Persons who are "Qualified Electors" in the district of an election should be allowed to give to campaigns.

          All Contrabutions of any size should be disclosed.

          Citizens should be allowed to bring charges for violations and have them prosecuted.

          Heavy fines for those giving and those knowingly receiving violations should occur. If in office, IMMEDIATE REMOVAL should also apply and the prosecution here should be total

      • Re:Foreign competitors (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Distinguished Hero ( 618385 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @09:06AM (#9166398) Homepage
        Jesus, can I find one thread not containing an anti-American comment at +5 insightful?

        We've demonstrated that our voting system has failed

        No, you've demonstrated that Florida's electoral system has failed. Thanks to the electoral college, Florida can choose to select their representatives however the hell they want. Regardless how much you whine about it, approximately 50% of voters voted for Bush. It's not like he won with 10% of the vote and a military coup. Gore might have had the popular vote, but the electoral college is there for a reason; whether that reason is valid, of course, is up for debate.

        that our leadership hates gays

        Look, I'm not saying that Bush is right to attempt to amend the constitution, but not allowing gays to vote is not necessarily hatred. Some would argue that marriage is designed solely for procreation, and includes certain incentives to facilitate that. Personally, I don't see marriage as having anything to do with love (certainly love can exist outside marriage); why do people need the state to acknowledge their love for each other?

        that our leadership hates ... muslims

        Half the time people insinuate that Bush is in bed with the Saudis (see Fahrenheit 911) and the other half of the time they insinuate that he hates the Muslims. If your leadership really hated Muslims, why would they attempt to stabilise the middle east. I'm sure you think that the Iraqi war is all about oil, and to some it probably is; however, if the administration really hated Muslims, why would they have waged the most humane war in modern history? Furthermore, if they hated Muslims so much, why don't they just invest a whole lot of money in alternative energy sources? Imagine what would happen to the OPEC countries if the US stopped buying their oil...

        and does nothing to protect middle america's jobs while all the fatcats get fatter by outsourcing anything and everything they can because they lost their sense of nationalism over a few dollars.

        So, now we're accusing Bush of not being nationalist enough? Outsourcing is not a clear cut issue. I'm not saying that I support it, but there are viable arguments on both sides of the fence. If you really wanted to stop outsourcing, you should stop buying items that where produced through outsourcing.

        Look, I'm tired of all the anti-American sentiment. As an European, I'd like to point out that Europe and the whole world would have been a lot more fucked up if it wasn't for the Americans. If you want to point out some dubious action undertaken by the US during the cold war, I'd like to point out (as someone who used to live very close to the Soviets) that had the US not fought the Cold war, the world would have been far worse off. Anyways, the people really responsible for the Cold War were those who were so terrified of the US being the only superpower, that they deemed it fit to give the Soviet Union the nuke, but that's for another post.
    • But it is currently not possible to patent trivia things!
      The current law is more like an analogy to the copyright of written books. So it is currently NOT possible to simply copy a software programm, and it is NOT possibly to infringe a patented mechanism!

      Remember that one of the most important patents - the mpeg layer 3 better known as mp3 - is from Germany, from the Frauenhofer Institute. And they were already able to protect their discovery with an european patent.

      So all people who compare europe

      • Re:bullshit - there is already a patent law in eur (Score:5, Informative)

        by Halo1 ( 136547 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @06:18AM (#9165909)
        But it is currently not possible to patent trivia things!
        That is incorrect. Just look at this patented webshop [ffii.org].
        Remember that one of the most important patents - the mpeg layer 3 better known as mp3 - is from Germany, from the Frauenhofer Institute. And they were already able to protect their discovery with an european patent.
        With several European Patents actually. This is the basic one:
        Digital coding process for transmitting and/or storing acoustic signals, specifically music signals, comprising the following steps:
        • N samples of the acoustic signal are converted into M spectral coefficients;
        • said M spectral coefficients are subjected to quantisation at a first level;
        • after coding by means of an entropic encoder the number of bits required to represent all the quantized spectral coefficients is checked;
        • when the required number of bits does not correspond to a specified number of bits quantization and coding are repeated in subsequent steps, each at a modified quantization level, until the number of bits required for representation reaches the specified number of bits, and
        • additionally to the data bits the required quantization level is transmitted and/or stored.
        As you can see, this is a patent not just on mp3 compression, but on any audio compression scheme which iteratively tries to compress an audio sample until it fits in a pre-determined number of bits.

        The problem with these European software patents is that they are currently in general not enforceable in a court. The reason is that the European Patent Convention forbids software patents. The European Patent Office is an independent institution however, which gets its funding from granting patents, so it creatively reinterpreted that convention. That does not change the law nor the opinion of the courts, however (except for the UK).

        You're right however that we have strong copyright laws, and that simply copying other people's code is not allowed (unless they agree, like in case of GPL'd code), not even if it's just a few lines.

  • First Post! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by thewldisntenuff ( 778302 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:11AM (#9165336) Homepage
    Our neighbors across the pond might actually have a good idea for once :) ...

    If the WIPO can get a standard software patent system across both sides (US and Euro), preferrably like the Europeans, we might not be reading Slashdot headlines every morning that read "Apple Patents the English Language!", etc. The US Patent system is dated, and needs change, especially when such patents can be made and there is such a high backlog of patents...Time shall tell, but this may be the first step in getting software/IP patents sorted out

    • Re:First Post! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by cshark ( 673578 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:51AM (#9165451)
      If this goes through, and is successful in Europe, I would imagine that it would only be a matter of time before the US conforms to a similar system. That would certainly make my life easier. Europeans aren't so bad. Many of the things they're doing in modern Europe are downright sensible. Socialized medicine for example. But that's a subject for another post. Glad to see it's not the whole world that gone mad. Just us crazy Americans...

  • Hm, interesting... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by NeoChaosX ( 778377 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:11AM (#9165337) Journal
    And for the Americans who may ask "It's Europe; who give a flying fuck?", you need to know that the entire European Union is much larger than the United States, both in population and economy. And since Germany is the EU's largest member (and the article also points out efforts in France to block the software patent laws), this this could really heat up the war over software patents.

    • Re:Hm, interesting... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:21AM (#9165363)
      I believe you're a bit behind the times. These days, it's the entire world that says "It's America, fuck them!"

      • Re:Hm, interesting... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by killjoe ( 766577 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @04:09AM (#9165647)
        If they do then it's all just hot air. Until the rest of the world stops buying american products they will suffer under our "leadership".

        People of the world. Get your shit together.

        Do not buy american products.
        Do not go to american movies.
        Do not listen to american music.
        Do not wear american clothing.

        People in the US laugh at you every time they see a protestor wearing a pepsi shirt or eating a mcdonalds.

        • Re:Hm, interesting... (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Yokaze ( 70883 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @05:29AM (#9165802)
          > People in the US laugh at you every time they see a protestor wearing a pepsi shirt or eating a mcdonalds.

          I think this is the perfect picture showing the "You are either with us or against us","The world hates us"-attitude

          Maybe they fail to remember that, very likely, the very same people demonstrating went to American embassies to express their condolences.
          Maybe those people fail to realise that those protestors are against a certain administration representing a certain policy.
          Maybe they are plain too dumb to understand that those demonstrators simply want to demonstrate their dissatifaction with the US administration policies but don't want the US economy to go down into a slump and see them be unemployed.

          And what would the reaction of those American people be when the world would boycott their products? Wouldn't it even enstrengthen the "World hates us"-feeling?
        • The world is not black and white. You can't act all the time with this simplistic binary thinking. "You don't like some of our foreign policies? Well then you're not allowed to like anything that we do!". Eh, yeah that's smart. Why would your music get any worse just because some of the things your president does aren't all good? Why would the entertainment value of your movies get worse? Why do I have to make the choice of either hating you all for everything you do, or to love you all for everything you d

        • Re:Hm, interesting... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Bananenrepublik ( 49759 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @07:07AM (#9166032)
          Until the rest of the world stops buying american products they will suffer under our "leadership".
          Don't the US have a hugedforeign trade deficit? I.e. they actually import much more than they export? So in a sense you could say that the rest of the world already did.

          • Re:Hm, interesting... (Score:3, Insightful)

            by orcrist ( 16312 )
            Don't the US have a hugedforeign trade deficit? I.e. they actually import much more than they export? So in a sense you could say that the rest of the world already did.

            In fact that's been the case for most of my life, I think. However, I have a personal theory that the U.S. exports something a bit more ephemeral than products:

            Our appetites and whims. Yes, you read that right. I truly think that the immense *hunger* of the U.S. consumer (pun intended) translates into a power over the world market whic
        • You dont't get it. The world does not protest american products, movies, music, clothing or McDonalds (some do, but I'm talking about the reasonable rest).

          The world protests American foreign policies. If they were to boycott American Everything, it would be much easier to call them Anti-American. They're not Anti-American. They love the American Way of Life, American Freedom and everything. They just wished the US would live it's own dream, instead of participating in the historic experiment "Why Rome coll

          • Re:Hm, interesting... (Score:3, Informative)

            by orcrist ( 16312 )
            Exactly!! Are you listening my fellow Americans? That is representative of almost every German I know (me: American living in Germany. But I speak fluent German, so they don't always spot me). I'm sure it's the case with most French. The Germans are anything *but* anti-American. Most of them are still very grateful for things like the Marshall Plan and the Berlin airlift, and they cheered and fawned last time Clinton visited. It's Bush, his government, and its policies, that they hate. That's all.

            If

    • Re:Hm, interesting... (Score:5, Informative)

      by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:35AM (#9165408)
      you need to know that the entire European Union is much larger than the United States, both in population and economy.
      Population, yes, economny, no: [wikipedia.org]

      EU GDP: 11.50 trillion Pop: 454,900,000
      US GDP: 10.40 trillion Pop: 290,343,000

      Sure a trillion more is a lot in absolute terms, but it's only 10%.

      Anyways in this case it might be more relavant to define a "software GDP," and for now I think the US would be #1 in that dept.

      If the EU does resist software patents, it should be interesting to watch: will monetizing every little idea create more value for US companies and keep them in the lead, or will the increased freedom in the EU lead to products that integrate all the best features, leading to EU dominance? And does Microsoft even care, since they can easily buy any company with patents they want? Stay tuned...

      • Re:Hm, interesting... (Score:5, Informative)

        by Scarblac ( 122480 ) <slashdot@gerlich.nl> on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:54AM (#9165462) Homepage

        10 new countries joined the EU on May 1. I remember hearing on the news back then that this made the EU economy bigger than that of the USA. I think your numbers are pre-expansion.

      • Re:Hm, interesting... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by TenPin22 ( 213106 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @04:53AM (#9165720) Homepage
        US National Debt = $7,147,545,929,573.40

        Or if you like $7.1 Trillion.

        http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdpenny.htm

        Dunno what the EU National debt is but I don't think we run a $500 Billion trade deficit and the Euro isn't a reserve currency and you can't buy oil directly with Euros (yet).

        Once you see the Euro as a reserve and oil currency you can kiss the US economy goodbye.

        All that American debt testifies to the USA's free ticket to creating dollars out of thin air. As long as they aren't spent in the USA they can effectively pay interest in dollars on the dollars it borrows from Asia, Russia, Europe, China and the Middle East.

        Once the rest of the world wakes up and starts trying to get out of the dollar for whatever reason (oil peak, war, terror attacks), allllll that cash will flow back to the USA and cause hyperinflation.

        Yes, the USA is heading for complete financial collapse taking most of the world with it leaving the EU to emerge as the dominant economic world power.

        If you look at history currency systems have only ever lasted about 30 years so we are long overdue for a complete crash since the USA stopped backing the dollar with gold in the 1970s.

        It's been a fun last 50 years but the party is almost over !

        Oh yeah and getting back to the topic, no software patents in Europe could be an incentive for companies to base in Europe only furtherering the USA's economic decline.

      • "Software GDP" (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Max Threshold ( 540114 )
        How can you define a "software GDP" when a U.S. company with a patent portfolio can suddenly declare that a few trivial lines of code are worth, say, three billion dollars?

        Software is not a tangible product and it has zero value. Only the service of producing and maintaining it has value. The EU is on the verge of acknowledging this; apparently, Americans are the only ones stupid enough to be duped by companies "monetizing every little idea," as you so succinctly put it.

  • A good first step (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ErichTheWebGuy ( 745925 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:12AM (#9165341) Homepage
    On Groklaw, this was reported [groklaw.net] last Thursday. Not only will Germany vote no, but there is some pretty heavy pressure on France to do the same. In fact, to quote Groklaw, "They call business methods patents on software corporate racketeering and say they don't want to copy US methods"

    The entities putting pressure on the French govt. include the head of MandrakeSoft, who has pretty heavy pull over in France. In fact, IIRC, a lot of French govt. agencies use Mandrake Linux.

  • strategy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bladesjester ( 774793 ) <slashdot.jameshollingshead@com> on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:13AM (#9165344) Homepage Journal
    all that companies in the EU will have to do if software patents are denied in the EU will be to set up a small arm of the company in the US. since most software products are sold here as well, they can just do the litigation here in the US. all it would take is for the company violating the patent to have an office or bank account in the US or to sell the offending product in the US...

    • Re:strategy (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      A patent in country A is not valid in country B, is it?

  • Patents work. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by digitalPortal ( 583193 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:13AM (#9165345)
    The overall premise of patenting an invention is valid and protects the inventor. However, I agree the current system is highly abused. The flaw in the current system, is the ability to patent 'IDEAS' even if you cant physically create a functioning prototype. For example, right now you can patent the 'IDEA' of a hovercraft car, and 50 years from now when someone actually develops a hovercraft car...they *must* pay royalties to you. ???? this needs to be changed. You should only be able to patent physical process (algorithms, products) and not ideas. -$0.02

    • Patent This (Score:5, Funny)

      by Deaper ( 659229 ) * <deaperNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:15AM (#9165352)
      I still want to get a patent for the human reproductive proccess so that I can essentially control who can and can not reproduce. Gosh knows somebody needs to.
    • Patents are to protect the creators idea. If I was to mention a completly original idea to someone, then they ran out and come up with a physical copy before me, patented it as their own idea, I could possible be screwed from millions/billions of $$'s. Of course there are alot more problems that may arise from that patent system, to take into account, But I am sure you can come up with some for yourself. Look what happened to Steve Jobs (Microsoft)

    • Re:Patents work. (Score:4, Informative)

      by McDutchie ( 151611 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @03:48AM (#9165596) Homepage
      You should only be able to patent physical process (algorithms, products) and not ideas.

      I thought that was called "copyright". The whole idea with patents is to monopolize ideas, not specific products which is copyright's domain.

    • Re:Patents work. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by linuxhansl ( 764171 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @03:58AM (#9165623)
      I agree, a patent is by itself a good concept.

      For software (aswell for music and movies, btw), however, copyright law already regulates ownership. Allowing patents on software is like allowing patents on sequences of tunes or on sequences of images. It's absurd.

      With copyright governing in the software world, you can be sure that whatever you write yourself from scratch is yours. With Patents allowed you may infringe on existing patents without your knowledge. That is the big difference.

      I don't know our friends in the music industry would react if patents on sequences of tunes or images would suddenly be allowed.

  • When it's all said and done... (Score:3)

    by DoraLives ( 622001 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:13AM (#9165346)
    my guess is that the entire house of cards in the US will all come crashing down. The canny Europeans seem to be looking slightly ahead here with an eye toward saving themselves some trouble farther down the road.

    • Re:When it's all said and done... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 16, 2004 @03:57AM (#9165622)
      Spot on.
      I've said this before here. What is going to happen when the huge backlog of trivial and unworthy patents are invalidated en masse? The stupid companies that spent money on them are going to lose them all outright. That would add up to billions of asset capital wiped off in an instant.

      These big corporations may feel smug and clever at grabbing patents on swinging sideways and one click whatever, but who will be laughing when they are told they are worth nothing and the money has gone. Not the shareholders that's for sure.

      Shareholders should act against companies making weak IP claims because they are just flushing money down the pan for the future.

      If you think that Europe is not 'cooperating' with the (ridiculous) American way of thinking about these things wait until you hear what the rest of the world thinks about it. You think the Indians and Chinese are going to repect twisted patents?
      Think again.

  • Amen (Score:5, Insightful)

    by WindowLicker916 ( 704800 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:15AM (#9165349)
    Hopefully this will eventually cause change in the American patent system. The current system pratically stifles competition and clogs our court systems, costing millions to tax payers. I mean, come on, why should one click shopping be considered a patentable idea?

    • Re:Amen (Score:3, Insightful)

      by penguinoid ( 724646 )
      I mean, come on, why should one click shopping be considered a patentable idea?

      Because it is worth several billion dollars to have a patent (monopoly) on it.

      • Re:Amen (Score:4, Insightful)

        by cmacb ( 547347 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:36AM (#9165412) Homepage Journal
        But only with our patent system. It's a self fulfilling prophesy that if you create an artificial limit on the availability of anything (in this case ideas) that what little remains will become more "valuable". If international trade continues to be the way of the world, only an international patent system with some "World Court" form of adjudication can make it work. Otherwise, we here in the US will continue our circle jerk in our own courts while unfettered innovation will take place somewhere else.

        Somethings got to give here. I wish I knew what it would be.

  • Well (Score:2, Insightful)

    by acceber ( 777067 )
    I suppose if Germany decides not to support the European Commission on changes in the law to software patents, then nobody can sway them otherwise because they are a sovereign state and don't have to comply with what the WIPO or the EC says.

    The WIPO as an agency of the UN, can aim to standardise patent laws worldwide but of course, international law isn't binding and Germany has all the right in the world to choose not to recognise law outside of their domestic jurisdiction.

    Ultimately, if Germany doesn'

    • WIPO/TRIPS actually FORBID software patents! (Score:5, Informative)

      by Halo1 ( 136547 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @05:16AM (#9165766)

      suppose if Germany decides not to support the European Commission on changes in the law to software patents, then nobody can sway them otherwise because they are a sovereign state and don't have to comply with what the WIPO or the EC says.

      First of all, as member of the EU, Germany has to comply with EU directives that are passed. Next, WIPO does not only not require software patents, it even forbids them (just like TRIPS).

      The excuse used by software patent proponents regarding TRIPs, is article 27:

      Patents shall be available for any inventions, whether products or processes, in all fields of technology, provided that they are new, involve an inventive step andare capable of industrial application.

      This text however explicitly uses terms which are defined nowhere else in the treaty (like "invention", "field of technology" and "inventive step"), so that signing members can define these terms themselves in such a way that they fit best in their existing laws.

      According to article 52 of the the European Patent Convention, a computer program can never constitute an invention. And in the Parliament proposal of the directive, "field of technology" is defined in such a way that computer programs, maths, business methods etc do cannot belong to one (even if they're executed on a computer).

      And on top of that, there's articles 7 TRIPs which is interpreted by the WTO as that the measures as implemented must ...

      .. contribute to the promotion of technological innovation and to the transfer and dissemination of technology, to the mutual advantage of producers and users of technological knowledge and in a manner conducive to social and economic welfare

      Most evidence points to the contrary as far as software patents are concerned.

      So TRIPs does not require software patents, how does it forbid them?

      Article 10 of the TRIPs treaty states:

      Computer programs, whether in source or object code, shall be protected as literary works under the Berne Convention (1971).

      As opposed to what a first reading would suggest, namely that this simply means that copyright protection must be available for computer programs, this article goes further. The WTO states on its website [wto.org] regarding article 10.1:

      The obligation to protect computer programs as literary works means e.g. that only those limitations that are applicable to literary works may be applied to computer programs.

      Since patent protection is unavailable for literary works, it can't be available for computer programs either according to TRIPs. Proponents of software patents often counter this using their interpretation of "computer program as such", which turns "computer programs with a further technical effect" into "computer-implemented inventions", which in turn would supposedly not be affected by this exclusion.

      This interpretation is however invalid due to article 4 of the EU Software Copyright directive from 1991. This article states that a computer program as literary work includes the following (emphasis mine):

      ... the permanent or temporary reproduction of a computer program by any means and in any form, in part or in whole. Insofar as loading, displaying, running, transmission or storage ...

      The WIPO Copyright Treaty also contains applicable clauses (article 10 [wipo.int]):

      (1) Contracting Parties may, in their national legislation, provide for limitations of or exceptions to the rights granted to authors of literary and artistic works under this Treaty in certain special cases that do not conflict with a normal expl

  • I also wonder... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ErichTheWebGuy ( 745925 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:21AM (#9165362) Homepage
    For the benefit of the uninformed, such as myself, can anyone shed some light on how international patent treaties work? Say,
    printf "hello world";\n
    is patented in the US, but in another country that has a patent treaty with the US, it is ruled that software patents are illegal.

    Who wins there? I would think local law would trump any treaties, but am I wrong?
    • OK, for all of you that will point out my glaring syntax error, allow me to commit this bugfix:
      printf "hello world\n";

    • Re:I also wonder... (Score:5, Informative)

      by arkhan_jg ( 618674 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @03:08AM (#9165501)
      Simple. there's no patent treaty between the US and the EU.

      With copyright, (the Berne convention) once it's written, it's automatically copyrighted in all Berne nations (which is most of them). Registering is still a good idea if you're expecting someone else to claim ownership on the same or very similar work. Licensing said works though, still has to be done via national bodies, which is one reason itunes hasn't come to europe yet.

      With patents, you need to register in every country you want patent protection in. The patent rules are not universal, and at least between the EU countries and the US, there's no treaty recognising each others patents. However, I believe it is possible to use patents from other nations to demonstrate prior art, and if you have a patent in one country, it can speed up the prior art examination in another.

      As far as software goes, there is a specific exemption in EU patent law that disallows pure software patents. This is what the big companies are lobbying to remove, under the guise of 'tidying up' the law. This is because the EPO has been granting 'computer implemented inventions' on the basis that if it needs hardware to run, or is part of a hardware system, the whole thing can be patented. Of course, these patents are of very questionable legitimacy, so the patent holders have not been sueing for infringement in europe as the end result would probably be they'd lose the patent.

      If they can change the law to legitimise their current patents though, and allow more, big US patent holders will be able to shut down large swathes of the EU software development houses (the EU has a huge number of small and medium companies, rather than the few big ones in the US, thus vulnerable to long winded patent ligitation)

      Note, the European Patent Office allows you to register your patent with them, and ask for it to be as valid in as many of the EPC signing nations as you want to pay for. The EPC is a patent convention, harmonising patent law between the signing nations, which includes some nations outside the EU itself. Definitely not the US tho!

      And my own position; patents on maths, ideas or business methods should remain illegal. We already have a method for protecting specific implementations of inventions in software, it's called copyright. Patents should be the process of protecting specific physical inventions, i.e. a specific mousetrap spring design, not the idea of 'a device that traps mammals'. Imagine if people started patenting plot ideas in novels or TV shows!

  • heh (Score:4, Funny)

    by maelstrom ( 638 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:25AM (#9165379) Homepage Journal
    One gets the impression we could make the EU do anything we wanted with reverse psychology.

    "OH Bush likes it? Dirty Texans, we shall do the opposite."

  • I guess I shouldn't get my hopes up (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:27AM (#9165385)
    It must be a sign of how jaded I've become .. I get no joy out of this announcement because there are probably 500 different things that will happen to reverse it or otherwise change it.

    I fully expect the United States to exert effort at the request of $LARGE_COMPANY on Germany to "harmonize" with US law.

    Then when/if US intellectual property law comes up for debate, the US will say "we can't have different laws than Europe, we must harmonize!"

    Who knows.. I'm not optimistic.

    • Re:I guess I shouldn't get my hopes up (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 16, 2004 @03:06AM (#9165495)
      Actually the US can't force the EC to do anything anymore. As someone pointed out, they have a larger economy (more people, yes... but it's still a larger economy). And frankly america has "lost face" over iraq, and this damages prestige. Prestige is hard to quantify, but if you piss everyone off over one issue... other things get harder.

      So the war in iraq isn't *just* sapping millions of dollars a day from the US, you are also losing prestige. Furthermore, your prestige is also going to take a *huge* blow if you pull out of iraq and let it become a hellhole/puppetdemocracy/iran2/whatever. People will say, "look that 'superpower' can't even conquer a tiny country properly - we have nothing to fear".

      So there are interesting days ahead, I for one used to believe in america as an ideal - dislike most of the people yes, but the ideal was there. You were my kin, I would have considered dying defending your shores were you under mortal threat (just as the french fought by you at your birth)... but now, I am indifferent, because not only do I dislike most americans now, but I think the american ideal has changed drastically. It is not something worth defending. Your legislators have wiped their asses on the constitution so many times you cannot read the print for the shit. And your populance has stood by and let this happen.

      Now the american ideal is the american cautionary tale for how not to let your democracy fail. Some will learn from it, others will not. Life will continue.

      America has left a mark on history, and it is still up for grabs as to what that mark exactly is. But right now, it's looking like a stain.

  • Dear America, (Score:3, Insightful)

    by adept256 ( 732470 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:34AM (#9165402)
    Your patent laws are a train wreck.

    Sincerly,

    The rest of the world.

  • Europe and USA (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Henrik S. Hansen ( 775975 ) <hsh@member.fsf.org> on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:34AM (#9165404) Homepage
    This is an example of how countries in Europe are *not* run by large corporations, but by the people (at least compared to the US).

  • Economic Advantage (Score:4, Insightful)

    by St. Arbirix ( 218306 ) <matthew...townsend@@@gmail...com> on Sunday May 16, 2004 @02:38AM (#9165421) Homepage Journal
    Methinks that the EU might be a good place to look into for some fun IT work if they regard the US system like that.

    Think on it: Within the EU software ideas will run wild, everyone having access to nuance inventions in their software, whilst over here in the US you won't be allowed to measure the length of a click, run an application within another, nor make an entire window transparent without getting permission from someone else (possibly paying for it).

    I wonder how long it will be before free Elvis albums won't be the only product of Europe States-side corporations will try to block.

    --

    Up through college in the US, everything else anywhere else.

  • [meta] time for an EU icon? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CComMack ( 570314 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @04:04AM (#9165633)

    Just a suggestion: might it not be wise to create a topic and icon for matters pertaining to EU law, in parallel to the Stars and Stripes icon often seen on YRO stories pertaining to US law? I for one am finding the many "earlier Slashdot stories" referenced in the text of every EU software patent story one reads nowadays to be a tedious method of threading.

    And before I get modded down by the Europe bashers, let me disclose that I'm an American who finds it edifying to keep up with events across the pond, and have no interest in the "Is Slashdot too Americentric" debate.

  • Pretty easy (Score:4, Insightful)

    by soccerisgod ( 585710 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @04:38AM (#9165701)

    If the german government choses to not vote in favor of this, then only because they're sure their vote is not needed in order to have this passed.

    Elections for european parliament are coming up. That's why. Don't be fooled for one minute by the german government: they voted against the iraq war even though they probably wanted it - to win elections. They don't critize the US for what happened in iraq recently, but are killing themselves to tell everyone how aweful the beheading of one US citizen was - to get a permanent seat in the UN security council.

    Don't trust them. They WANT this law. They fought for it for years. They're just opportunistic, that's all.

    • Re:Pretty easy (Score:3, Insightful)

      by anshil ( 302405 )
      Well ain't this the very idea of democracy? To force the leaders to do that what the people want, and not to follow their own needs?

    • Re:Pretty easy (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ahillen ( 45680 )
      Elections for european parliament are coming up. That's why.

      Yes. And, I mean, everybody knows that software patents is a hotly debated topic where the average german/european voter is emotionally very attached to, right? Right.

      they voted against the iraq war even though they probably wanted it - to win elections.

      I don't have any reason to believe that the german government really wanted the war. And knowing the political history of the current ruling parties in Germany, doubly so.

  • Belgium will vote against as well! (Score:3, Informative)

    by andr0meda ( 167375 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @05:51AM (#9165859) Journal

    Ok, so that's a small country, but still.. there is some political momentum to vote against. If we can convince one mor member state to vote against, the vote will be dismissed.

  • mod me Un-insightful (Score:3, Insightful)

    by moviepig.com ( 745183 ) on Sunday May 16, 2004 @08:59AM (#9166369)
    What sort of legal definition could discriminate between a software and a non-software patent?

    ...and, bearing in mind that patents are a means of enlisting the prodigious creative efforts of the masses, isn't innovation in software at least as desirable as in any other arena?

    (With respect to patent-abuse, anything can and will be abused. The question is always whether such negative side-effects can be suppressed enough to net a clear benefit.)

    I assume /. has addressed these questions earlier, but I couldn't find succinct answers...

Slashdot Top Deals

Our OS who art in CPU, UNIX be thy name. Thy programs run, thy syscalls done, In kernel as it is in user!

Close