![Patents Patents](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/patents_64.png)
![IT IT](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/it_64.png)
EU Software Patent Directive Adopted 455
sebFlyte writes "FTA: "An EU Council spokeswoman said on Monday morning that the Computer Implemented Inventions Directive had been adopted." Apparently it's due to 'institutional reasons' that they're ignoring the outcry from developers and several nation states ..."
aarrghhh! (Score:5, Insightful)
Land shark! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Land shark! (Score:3, Funny)
duun-dun (pause) duuun-dun (pause) duuun-dun (pause)
dun-dun-dun-dun-dun-dun-dun-dun-dun-dun-dun-dun
Re:Wait a minute... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Wait a minute... (Score:3, Insightful)
Any fixing of the system should also remove any economic incentive to grant or deny patents.
It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:5, Insightful)
Being personally deeply affected by this directive - I own a software company that does a huge amount of R&D - I really hope the MEPs will do the right thing.
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:5, Informative)
The second reading will be much more difficult than the first reading because this time they need a majority of all MEP's (not just MEP's present) to change the directive.
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:4, Informative)
>Your MEP sits in the Parliment, and that has made it perfectly clear it
>doesn't like this stuff.
>Your MEP sits in the Parliment, and that has made it perfectly clear it
>doesn't like this stuff.
Yes, but they now all have to hate this stuff enough to show up and vote.
>Get you MP to join with other MP's to put pressure on your government
>to change it's position in the Commission
You mean the counsel.
That was the plan until last friday. It even kind of succeded here in Denmark (The MP's joined and put pressure on the government, but it is not clear how much the government actually changed its position inb the councel).
But unless this last decision gets annulled, it is too late to put pressure on your government.
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:5, Interesting)
It all depends. On the surface, this is about patents, but (assuming we're not being misled) this is about democracy, and the EU Parliament being made irrelevent.
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:5, Insightful)
Frankly I think it is time to make a way bigger deal out of this. If this is the way Europe is to be run, then I'm voting 'No' to Europe.
This is a total joke, this whole thing. It's enough to make one want to go visit the Luxembourg representative of today with a token of one's gratitude, by which I do not mean flowers. Whereas this is of course unfair, because they only moved it on because it was taking up too much of their time (aww).
The EU Commission needs to be deleted from the landscape.
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:4, Informative)
I don't think so. I believe it requires an absolute majority: that is, abstentions or absentees are counted as votes in favor.
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm afraid so. I don't know if it has changed (the current MEPs are relatively new) but there was a TV documentary about MEPs showing up, signing the presentation list for the (considerable) travel expenses and leaving immediately.
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:2, Informative)
Re: Do they realize... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:4, Insightful)
Personally I think that around 70% of EU patents which would come into force are owned by companies from outside of the EU is a good enough reason not to allow it.
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:5, Insightful)
Lastly, patents are worthless without the means to back them up. A "large enough portfolio" mainly means you're willing to go to court to defend your claims.
If this directive is passed, European software researchers like my firm are basically put out of business. We cannot recover or protect our past investment, and our clients will not risk working with technology from small firms with no patent protection.
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:3, Informative)
Not true in EU. Here the patent is granted based on the application date, not the "discovery" date, which applies in the US. Makes it much clearer.
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:4, Insightful)
Does not make sense. This would create a huge opportunity for confusion.
I believe - but need to do more research to be entirely sure - that while the application date applies, the US patent application date would apply in Europe as well, under WIPO rules.
This means that while European software firms have been explicitly denied the right to get patents on their inventions, US firms have been aquiring rights that will be enforced in Europe. Prior art will help to some extent but only if (a) the prior art was published before the US patent application date, and (b) the European firm is willing to go to court to fight the case.
Apart from open source, there is not a tradition of publishing software prior art in Europe, which will hamper efforts to find it.
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:5, Insightful)
US Corporations have a helluva lot more financial resources then ANY EU corporations and will drive any opposing corporation in the ground, just like they do over here in the US.
This is indeed a sad day for democracy, we shall have to wait and see if the EU parliament will pass this with a majority. If they do, I fear we will be entering into a new dark age, one this time that is not ruled by kings and nobles, but CEO's and board of directors.
Re:It still has to go for a 2nd reading... (Score:3, Interesting)
It also has the potential to severely damage the UK games industry - there are around 400+ game development teams. These would be seen as a cash cow for McKool Smith given their litigation with Electronic Arts, Take-Two Interactive, Ubisoft, Activision, Atari, THQ, Vivendi Universal Games, Sega, Square Enix, Tecmo, LucasArts, and Namco Hometek [gamedaily.com]
Not the end of the world...yet. (Score:3, Informative)
"The directive will now be passed to European Parliament, which can reject or amend the proposal, for a second reading."
Re:What if... (Score:3, Interesting)
The EU is shit.
Re:What if... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Not the end of the world...yet. (Score:3, Insightful)
Not only have the council ignored the parliament, and broken their own rules in the process, they've got the directive to the point where only a 2/3rds majority of all members states can prevent it becoming law (which isn't going to happen short of a miracle). No restart happens unless the parliament rejects it.
no suprise there. (Score:2)
Re:no suprise there. (Score:5, Interesting)
So (nearly) did a blanket 100PS power limit on every motorcycle manufactured in or imported into the EC. This was former Commissioner Martin Bangemann's pet project, and it took intensive lobbying from among others, the Motorcycle Action Group [mag-uk.org] and Triumph Motorcycles [triumph.co.uk] to slow it down, but it only died when Bangemann himself ceased to be a Commissioner.
This was a virtally unresearched, transparently anti-competitive (Bangemann was trying to protect BMW [bmw.com], who, up until about five years ago, had a similar self-imposed limit) piece of legislation, supported by almost no-one else and more than once rejected by the European Parliament, yet it still took the downfall of its sponsor to kill it.
Moral?
EU Commissioners have far too much power, far too little responsibility, and are too difficult to get rid of.
Incidentally, I'm uncertain whether BMW themselves actually had anything to do with this mess, but shortly afterward, they lifted their self-imposed limit and now make some very nice [bmwmotorcycles.com] bikes.
Let me be the first to say... (Score:4, Insightful)
These people will cry the day they get a cease and desist from Microsoft because their child programmed a bubble sort in LOGO class, in first grade.
it's time to become (more)anonymous (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:it's time to become (more)anonymous (Score:3, Interesting)
Look to Africa and Asia to be the lead innovators as the EU and America descend into a new dark age.
Note that this means it goes back to Parliament (Score:5, Informative)
Time for a straightforward declaration of our own, I think:
"We, the undersigned, will not honour or respect european patent law any more. There are millions of us. You'll have to kill us all before you ever get your patent monopolies, you corrupt corporatist fuckers. Good day."
Re:Note that this means it goes back to Parliament (Score:5, Insightful)
Time for a lobby (Score:5, Interesting)
It's Not Oer Yet... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It's Not Oer Yet... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's Not Oer Yet... (Score:3, Interesting)
For absolute majority 367 votes of 732 is needed, this equates around 50.136612 %, not 70 as stated in the parent.
Four things can happen now:
1. The EP approves the Council's proposal. This ends the process and the proposal is made into law.
2. The EP approves the proposal but with amendments. The new proposal is then sent to the Council for a second reading. This requires absolute majority or 367 votes of 732. Before the Council's second reading the Commission is allowed to mak
Always go to ffii.org (Score:5, Informative)
Here's the press release [ffii.org]
Patent everything! (Score:2)
Get them in now! If we can flood them with a few million patent applications per day, they'll be likely to just start approving everything. Imagine your new income after you have a patent on such non-obvious things as simple boolean logic [slashdot.org].
Re:Patent everything! (Score:2, Insightful)
No don't. This is exactly what the bureaucrats want. More work for so-called civil 'servants' and administrators = more money for government departments = more power and influence for politicians = justification for higher taxes = socialism creeping in by the back door.
Re:Patent everything! (Score:3, Insightful)
We need to avoid both. A corporation that can influence government policy in its own interests is essentially part of an enlarged state. We even speak of the M$ tax already.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Land of the Free... (Score:2)
Re:Land of the Free... (Score:2)
All they have to do is win once. And it's pretty much over for a long long time.
On the other hand, the anti-patent side has to win every time to keep it out.
When the Pro-Patent side are paid for by almost bottomless pockets, and the anti-patent by ethics and common sense, in todays world, it's just a matter of time.
thats it! (Score:2, Funny)
The European Constitution (Score:3, Insightful)
I personally don't want to live in a dictatorship where the will of the parliament is disregarded by people who have been elected by no-one.
Today's commission is like russia's communist party. Make sure they go back to home with a lesson they will never forget.
Re:The European Constitution (Score:5, Insightful)
Where to immigrate to? (Score:5, Insightful)
Where are you going to immigrate to? It looks like the whole western world is falling beneath the monopoly behometh of (software) patents. We can expect Trading Technologies to shake down all trading firms, large and small, as well as all western exchanges, and Microsoft will leverage patents to eradicate GNU/Linux as anything other than an underground resistence of shrinking mindshare, and probably stifle most other innovations as well. The Free Software world will likely be looking to China for sanctuary in the near future, which is a situation so loaded with irony it defies imagining, proving once again that fact is orders of magnitude stranger than fiction.
We have about three years before this directive becomes law in Europe. Microsoft may or may not wait those three years before attacking software freedom in America, but we can all be assured that in five years time it will be virtually impossible for us as software programmers to practice our art and our profession in the west, without a patron from one of the major software houses (Microsoft, Apple, IBM).
This isn't the end of the world, but it is the end of a dynamic, innovative industry. This is hardly unprecidented. Poor governance and patents have destroyed and stifled many innovative industries, from the AT&T monopoly that destroyed hundreds of competing phone companies and froze the technology solid for sixty-plus years, to aviation, to chemistry, to biogenetics and medicine, and so on and so forth. Now its our turn, and we didn't stand up soon enough or speak loudly enough. Well, some of us did, but we were too few and too late.
So I ask again, where can we go? What countries are left that have not fallen beneath the Microsoft/IBM/Sun regime of software patents, and how long can we reasonably expect them to hold out against Americas wonton aggression in forcing our corporate interests down the world's collective throat?
Has China truly become our last, best hope for freedom?
Re:The European Constitution (Score:5, Insightful)
That seems slightly less than brilliant.
Re:The European Constitution (Score:3, Informative)
Over the past year, we have seen how "powerful" the EP is in codecision, with both the Council and Commission ignoring everything they say (first reading) or ask (restart). And today, we have seen how much
ffii article (Score:2, Interesting)
FFII Press Release (Score:5, Informative)
And as someone else already said: the Council has adopted its "common position" (although it was far from common in this case). It still has to get into the European Parliament, through its second reading (where it can be amended or even rejected, after which the whole game is immediately over).
Anyway, as far as I am concerned, the big news is not what they adopted (a directive text which codifies the European Patent Office's US practice), but how they adopted it. Three countries with the support of several others asked to reopen discussions, and the Luxembourg presidency simply denied that even though they have to let the Council as a whole decide about that according to their own rules of procedure [eu.int] (point 3.8).
Re:So they broke the procedure (Score:5, Informative)
Knuts (Score:3, Insightful)
I guess we have to look to the Chinese now for inovatave software, along with everything else.
I know it isnt over, but it's like the long walk to the gas chamber. you can guess the outcome.
Sad Day
Re:Knuts (Score:3, Informative)
Write to your member of the EU parliament now (Score:5, Insightful)
They even asked the EU-Commission to restart the whole process, but the Commission flat out denied this request. I can't imagine that members of parliament like to be treated like that.
So please, write your local member of the EU parliament and tell him that you ask him to do everything within his power to stop this madness.
Re:Write to your member of the EU parliament now (Score:5, Insightful)
David
God Bless America!!! (Score:2)
Okay I'm kidding... I don't believe in god. I hate to say it, but this is just what happens in a world where money is the primary motivator for things. It's important -- I work for money too -- but I also love my job and wouldn't leave it unless there was a profoundly good reason to do so...(such as an offer of much more money!) Nothing I say here will likely change anything, but when your motivator is money, think about what you're doing to the world and take interest in
Looks like the anti Linux law suits will start (Score:3, Insightful)
This has been the one thing that MS before going after IBM, HP, SGI, etc. over Linux. In fact, the only company with a get out of jail free card is Sun (and probably SCO).
Next couple of months are going to prove to be interesting.
Nah (Score:2)
Flipped around, if I impliment some obvious idea that happens to be patented,
Extremely high suckiness coefficient (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words, the EU Council has just stated that form is more important than meaning, and that it is more important that the bureaucrats are able to create legislation quickly and effortlessly than the legislation being fair and correct.
This is the crappiest thing I've heard in a long while! What's next, stopping citizens from seeing official documents because it creates unnecessary expenses and only whiners ask to see them anyway? Or removing the right to vote for all citizens of the EU, because recurring elections could hamper the ability of EU politicians to make long-term plans?
--Bud
Re:Extremely high suckiness coefficient (Score:2, Funny)
I can just see some EU and US politicians reading this and thinking "huh? is this parody, i don't get the joke"
What have YOU done? (Score:2, Insightful)
What have you done for the democracy, liberty and human rights? Yes, I mean you! If all you do is w
Re:What have YOU done? (Score:4, Insightful)
Somethins is rotten (Score:5, Insightful)
And so they did. Try, that is. But was told that it was impossible for an A-item to become a B-item. They believed it, and didn't object further. This is bogus, because there's nothing that prevents A-items to be ruled as B-items. I smell a rat!
Re:Somethins is rotten (Score:5, Interesting)
Implications for a European believer in democracy (Score:5, Interesting)
I've been fundamentally opposed to the EEC/EU for as long as I've been an adult voter. I first voted "No" to a proposal to expand EEC powers in 1986, and I've consistently followed this path, ever since.
In recent years, however, I had been considering a number of arguments in favour of the EU, and I was actually leaning towards voting in favour of the new constitutional treaty, at the upcoming referendum (in my native Denmark).
Not any longer.
If I had any doubts about voting "No" at the upcoming referendum, this situation has removed them. The process has revealed a complete disinterest in democracy at the highest levels of the EU - and a servility towards "business interests" (for which read: certain major corporations and their vested interests in maintaining their monopolistic powers) that borders on the shameful.
The autumn, I will go to the polls and vote "No". I urge any Europeans with similar concerns to adopt the same position.
Re:Implications for a European believer in democra (Score:2)
It seems to me, judging from the above quote from TFA, that Democracy still has a chance to deal with this matter. Furthermore it seems to me that rejecting the European constitution out of hand simply because of software patents is a bit short sighted. The way the matter of Software patents has been handled in the EU may leave something to be desired but it is still no worse than the hors
Re:Implications for a European believer in democra (Score:5, Informative)
Stopping the new Constitution will not get rid of the EU, or make it more democratic. Voting "no" will keep it the way it is now.
So you would be doing the "people who have a complete disinterest in democracy" a big favour by voting "No".
The new European Constitution greatly enhances the powers of the European Parliament, and so tricks like what the Council did today would become a lot harder.
There are 2 ways out of this undemocratic EU. One is to get rid of it. This is clearly not an option -- almost all economic growth in Europe in the last 20 years is due to the single market. Removing it would be an economic disaster.
Option 2 is to overhaul the EU to make it a lot more democratic. While I agree that it doesn't go far enough, the new Constitution is a huge step in the right direction.
So, please vote "Yes" on the new Constitution. It's our only way out!
Re:Implications for a European believer in democra (Score:4, Insightful)
In other words, only vote yes for the consitution if you think this is the way the EU needs to be governed for the next couple of centuries. If you need more to feel happy with the EU, vote no. I guess.
Re:Implications for a European believer in democra (Score:3, Insightful)
Also constitutions are not set in stone, they can be changed. For example, the German constitution was last changed in summer 2002 (animal protection was added as a 'state goal' to the constitution). Unlike 'normal' laws, however, it takes more to be able to change it - in Germany, a 2/3 majority in both chambers is required. I don't know what is necessary to change t
Constitution gives more power to parliament? (Score:4, Insightful)
What I want to know is whether or not the constitution gives more power to the parliament. The parliament is apparently the body we (grassroots, minor busninesses, economicians) can influence. The closed and undemocratic bodies of the Commision and Council are in the hands of ip lawyers and multinationals.
If the parliament is strengthed, I'll vore for the constitution. If it is weakened, I'll vote against.
Re:Constitution gives more power to parliament? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Constitution gives more power to parliament? (Score:5, Interesting)
If you think Bendtsen is an idiot presently, try reading this: Minutes, meeting of the Folketing's EU Affairs Committee, June 23 2004 [www.ft.dk]. Bendtsen is just about the most arrogantly ignorant idiot you can imagine, and this really shows him off as what he is. Note his condescending tone...
In response to the several posters who have urged me to vote "Yes" because, in their estimation, a vote against the new treaty merely supports the undemocratic nature of the EU, I can only say that they obviously have not read the treaty text.
The "new EU" is by no means any more democratic than the present. In fact, it retains the current system whereby the unelected council dominates the political process. Since it also takes away veto rights of individual (democratically-elected) national parliaments, I consider it a step backwards for democracy in the EU. The present mess has only convinced me that it is a proud and noble thing to vote "No".
Hey, at least they're being honest... (Score:5, Insightful)
Or as they put it, "We are adopting the position for institutional reasons so as not to create a precedent which might have a consequence of creating future delays in other processes."
In other words, they want to do what they want to do, and they don't want protests or disagreements getting in their way, now or ever.
I guess Europe just fell to corporate interests.
I think it's shocking that we're giving all tech freedom to China. It'll be the only country on they planet where it'll be legal to double click and include a help icon with your software.
Re:Hey, at least they're being honest... (Score:3, Interesting)
How traditional... (Score:4, Interesting)
and if you get bored doing that demonstrate that you didn't give a damn anyway.
I don't fathom how I can possibly write any software that doesn't infringe "something", all the more amusing if I sat in a room for some time and worked out an "obvious" way to solve some problem.
I think it's fair to say that China is going to kick us all inside out with technological advancement now. Well, serves us right in some way I guess
where is info (Score:2, Informative)
Anybody can point out some document saying what was the vote of each particular country - for all 25 of them? Everybody just mentions Denmark, Poland sometimes Portugal or Spain.
I listened to audio links on ffii.org ... I appreciate the effort, but the information quality is low. 1st 5 minutes is just "test ... another test ... one more test ..." and the rest gives again no insight on what actually happened.
The audio files from meeting in May 2004 were much more helpfull, thought I could n
Re:where is info (Score:3, Informative)
In today's council meeti
If we assume that SW patents are to become reality (Score:2, Interesting)
If this is going to be forced upon us, can we do anything to take some of the bite out of it?
For example, we know that it is prohibitively expensive for the man in the street to register patents for the kind of trivia that Megacorp Inc. are inclined to do. So does anyone know if there is any kind of facility for proactively declaring prior art?
In other words, if I produce something and release it as GPL - is there somewhere where I could also declare that anything patentable within it
OSC Press Release (Score:3, Informative)
Mark Taylor, Executive Director of the Open Source Consortium has branded the concept of European democracy a sham. This follows the adoption of the controversial proposals on software patents (the computer-implemented inventions directive) by the European Council.
He said,"..the fact that an unelected body can ride rough shod over the near unanimous wishes of an elected parliament demonstrates that any pretensions the EU has to being democratic are just that - pretensions. To many this smacks of institutionalised deference to vested interest and intrigue, some of which originate outside the EU.
"Without this law Europe has a chance to lead the World but now risks sinking into mediocrity behind areas of the world free of this kind of castration.
"This law, if it is passed, will crush the economic prospects of entrepreneurial software organization seeking to challenge multinational
proprietary interests. As such the government of Europe has shown that it is incapable of standing up to global commercial interests and incapable of handling its own consultative process.
"I would call on all stakeholders in Open Source and other affected software industries to demand and require their MEPs to re-instate democracy."
Ends
GPL modification (Score:3, Interesting)
If you sue anyone for patent infringement, you lose your right to use patented techniques under the GPL. i.e. anyone else who wrote GPL software can then sue you.
This could be made to work, since when someone releases GPL software, they are essentially granting a free license to everyone to use any patented methods within the software. If that right were revoked for those starting lawsuits, it could be a useful start.
It could, in principle, fix the problem of large real companies (eg Microsoft) trying to crush smaller ones. What is left unresolved is how to deal with the really bad guys: "pure IP organisations" such as Eolas.
We've seen this before in the U.S. (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not writing to gloat, merely to inform. From my standpoint, unelected legislators are never a good idea. If you must have two legislative houses in the EU, better to have an upper and a lower house where both are popularly elected. If I lived over there I would vote against any Constitution that featured an unelected body.
Sad day indeed... (Score:3, Insightful)
Let me just say that those of you that think that the fact this only means that the directive is now sent to parliament is any consolation... Think again!
They are NOT going to back down just because a couple of thousand geeks want them to.
The problem is, even if the open source development takes a dive into the underground, and software gets developed without a license and hosted on obscure ftp servers or encrypted BitTorrents, what will it really matter.
If developers can't create and sell their software or services without having to spend thousands of euros every month to check whether there are any prior patents, any independent development is dead in the water.
And sadly just when it started to get interesting (not a coincidence)...
Personally I gave up developing independently, commercially a few years ago. I'm now developing in house applications for a large industrial cooperation. I wonder how the in house development is going to be governed. We hardly buy any software; everything is developed by a team of developers. I don't see it happening that we will pay for the right to create our own 'clickable command buttons' and other bizarre patents.
Hell, we'd probably need to start by patenting all the stuff we made already, not to sell or license it, but just to protect ourselves from other guys who probably thought of the same stuff.
When will people learn that there is no reason why 10 or 100 or 1000 people couldn't come up with the exact same idea at the same time?
It's just so ridiculous.
Condolences: (Score:5, Insightful)
Currently, the 'blood of patriots' is worth something less than a hundred dollars on the open markent, and with your spare change you can purchase the integrity and immortal souls of every member of congress. The war is over, and we, the 'have-nots', have been roundly defeated.
However, all is not lost. In order to prevent any sort of cohesive resistance, the powers that be have elected to maintain a plentiful supply of beer at reasonable prices, and insure that you can get 200 channels of daytime television for a reasonable monthly fee. Sit back, watch another MASH re-run, and have a cold one mate. Cheers!
Re:see you (Score:2)
Interesting point though: would the proposed European Constitution make things better or worse in this respect? Who will gain more power, the European Parliament or the European Council / Commission?
Re:see you (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Euro constitution vote (Score:3)
Re:Not Good (Score:2)
Re:What's the matter? If you don't agree you have. (Score:5, Insightful)
A patent grants EXCLUSIVE rights to one of those ways.
Therefore, you have just created a land war. Only the rich and monied win a land war. Soon, you'll have nowhere to live. Good luck with that.
Put simply, there is no "stealing of ideas". That's ludicrous. I take your car? You have no car. I take your method of bush trimming? Both of our bushes get trimmed. That's life.
That's also the worst case. On the other hand, what if I develop a similar way of trimming bushes? Now who's stealing. I just wanted to trim my bushes, now you can take money from me! Who's the thief?
At some point the businesses of the world are being given the power to own the EXCLUSIVE right to sell something. I think we all know why that's bad. No competition == screwing people.
It's bad when the government mandates it (national telecomm companies). It's bad when monopoly enforces it (Standard Oil, Microsoft). It's bad when the people suffer it.
If I develop MY IDEA independently of you, I'll be damned if your patent should matter to me. Unfortunately, this is now my problem.
Worse, now the only people with significant patent portfolios won't be people. Instead they'll be the most morally reprehesible construct mankind has ever unleashed--corporations. Worst of all, they're pretty much designed to aggregate financial and legislative power.
Someday, this may cause a revolution...I hope.
Re:What's the matter? If you don't agree you have. (Score:3, Interesting)
Karl Marx thought so, too. He identified the problem all right - read the parts of the Communist Manifesto that deal with how capitalist imperialism was set to evolve and tell me it hasn't happened. Globalisation, corporatism, empire by proxy, it's all there. Unfortunately, his proposed solution didn't work out.
Any better ideas? I thought European-style social democracy was working pretty well, but the EU seems intent on acting paradoxically against its own
That's great, if that's how it worked... (Score:5, Insightful)
That's an excellent argument. Unfortunately, it sounds very much like the star-eyed idealism that makes communism sound good: "If we all work together, one for another, we can achieve great things." Looks good on paper, but it falls apart under the shear force am individual greed and selfishness.
Corporations as a charter granted by the people to perform specific tasks are good. Corporations with equal rights as individuals are bad. Like Frankenstein's monster, corporations have turned on those they were built to serve. How have they turned on us? Corporations make up the largest single block of money funding lobbyists and politicians. It is well-documented that the politician who spends the most money is most likely to get elected.
So, figure it out. Corporations and individuals representing corporations contribute the most money to political campaigns. And they don't do it simply because they want a particular candidate to win: they do it so that their particular candidate will win, and owe them a favor.
See this [political-reform.net] for more information. There's a lot more out there, too. Corporations in their current form are not the pinnacle of civilisation; they are a threat to democracy and liberty. Until we have divested them of their current legal status as protected individuals, and returned them to their former status as chartered entities, corporations, by their actions, tend to be evil.
(No, not all corporations are evil. But many tend to evil, such as those self-same airplane manufacturers, Starbucks, the pharmacuetical companies, the oil companies, and Wal*Mart.)
Re:What's the matter? If you don't agree you have. (Score:3, Interesting)
They are doing this by trying to apply patents and copyrights nearly universally (remember HP trying to apply the DMCA to printer cartridges?). Next thing you know, auto parts will have anti-circumvention devices and special lock codes so only a licensed auto-mechanic can repair them. Then you have DVD region codes (which HP seems to want to include now in
Re:What's the matter? If you don't agree you have. (Score:5, Informative)
No one is defending stealing. The problem is (or this is the belief of many here) that it is not possible to write software without violating patents unvoluntarily: if you write a large enough software package, you just end up implementing patented algorithms without realising it. This leads to a situation where only big corporations can develop software (since they have a stack patents that they can bargain with when someone claims they're violating a patent). A "GNU license" is not going to help you there.
Re:What's the matter? If you don't agree you have. (Score:3, Informative)
Oh, the IP man is back. Let me say this once again. There are no economic arguments proving your case. I have asked many times here, and on other bulletin boards, for such proof. None is ever forthcoming. In fact, most research on the subject shows that a patent system distorts the market and has no positive effects on innovation.
See, for example, the paper by the economist Bronwyn H. Hall at the University of California
Re:What can be done? (Score:3, Informative)
1. Follow the Latest News at http://ffii.org (it tends to be the first place news comes out and is comprehensive).
2. Sign the various petitons (e.g., Thank Poland).
3. Lobby your own MP and MEP (spamming all MPs / MEPs is likely to get you ignored).
4. Write to the media with your concerns (e.g., the UK is thinking about a Computer Tax to replace TV licensing - front page Times last week. Can the Software Patents "Software Tax" make the front page too?)
Re:ugh (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:ugh (Score:3, Funny)