Sites Shut Down to Protest Software Patents 563
blueser writes "I went today to TUTOS homepage to check for a newer version, and I was surprised to see that the author replaced the homepage by a 'Closed because of Software-Patents' page, with a brief explanation." Just one site? that's hardly a big deal, but there's more. maliabu writes "Knoppix is closed, apparently waiting for the European Parliament to decide about the legalisation and adoption of so-called 'software patents' in Europe." And still more. SLbigE writes "The Wine HQ website has temporarily shut down its webpage in protest to a proposed law in Europe regarding Software Patents." There's many more sites as well, these were just the first I was alerted to, Feel free to note some more in comments. Looks like they're doing a good job of illustrating what could be lost soon.
Rpm find (Score:2, Informative)
Re: Slashdot is not down (Score:5, Informative)
"Slashdot is not, however, even though some have requested it be taken down for the day..."
Well, someone has to be up to let people know what is going on.
Re: Slashdot is not down (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Rpm find (Score:5, Informative)
My site is shut-down [blibbleblobble.co.uk].
Others include KDE, Gimp, gnu-darwin, GNU-savannah, and most of the French and German linux sites.
Re:Rpm find (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, and here's the reason why [slashdot.org] : since the protest is about European software patents, Slashdot doesn't give a toss.
Re:Rpm find (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not that it may come back to bite at people in the US, it's that it bites people in the US every day, because the laws being considered in the EU are not that different from the laws those o
Re:Rpm find (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Rpm find (Score:3, Insightful)
Who, here, would be wearing a big smile when they say to their boss, "Sorry, I can't get that information/patch/download for our production webservers, because the Apache site voluntarily decided that some political issue was more important than our business."
In fact, it was/is/will be responsible and expected for widely-used and critical websites to sa
Re:Rpm find (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Rpm find (Score:5, Interesting)
These site shutting down in protest is not very professional. This is one of the problems with the free software community, politics plays too heavy of a role in their actions.
If you are too timid to take actions that are going to inconvenience somebody you will never be noticed. Software patents are serious. You lose your Linux dodad today; software patents could eventually make you lose them forever.
For instance, do you really believe that the labor movement would ever have gotten anywhere if they never held any strikes? That the civil rights movement would have gotten anywhere if they never got in anybody's face?
The road to hell is paved with business as usual. Shutting down your websites may be "unprofessional", but it makes a meaningful protest that gets across the point of just how serious these sites believe the issue is.
-Rob
Re:Rpm find (Score:5, Insightful)
I for one knew nothing about it, or how it would affect me. Now I do, and if they ever needed a signature against it, I would sign. Because I was made aware though this protest.
Re:Rpm find (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, they are serious. I've been bombarding my local MEPs about it. And recently I got a very interesting response [credit1.co.uk].
It made me think that maybe we misunderstand the proposal [eu.int] - especially after it was recently been amended.
I quote directly from Article 4a:
Exclusions from patentability:
A computer-implemented invention shall not be regarded as making a technical contribution merely because it involves the use of a computer, network or other programmable apparatus. Accordingly, inventions involving computer programs which implement business, mathematical or other methods and do not produce any technical effects beyond the normal physical interactions between a program and the computer, network or other programmable apparatus in which it is run shall not be patentable.
Justification
This, in conjunction with the corresponding recital, provides clarification that simply specifying technical means is not enough for patentability. There must be a technical contribution. It also makes it clear that the computer implementation of a business method simpliciter is not a patentable invention."
IANAL but to me that satisfies everything we, as Free Software advocates, are seeking? Why are we so strongly opposing this? If you read the full directive, it sounds fairly sensible.
Re:Rpm find (Score:4, Informative)
- Industrial application: the EPO interprets this as "usable in a way that makes money". Don't believe me? One of the biggest proponents of software patents said so himself [wiki.ael.be] in the JURI meeting, when other proponents mentioned they were afraid that this requirement would exclude too many software patents.
- Technical effect: first of all, the "normal physical interaction between a program and the computer" is nowhere defined. Furhter, technical is also nowhere defined (and they don't want to define it, they say it has to follow from case law). In other words, you need anundefined effect apart from something which is not defined, so what could that be? Plenty of things [iusmentis.com], it turns out (see the heading "When is something technical"). Examples: processing data representing an image, saving memory, increasing speed, using computers instead of humans to process secret/private/sensitive data and automating a known process if the automated process provides surprising speed or economy of scale benefits.
Keep in mind that the directive is designed to legalise all software patents that have been illegally granted until now by the EPO. You can find some examples of patents which such "technical effects" here [iusmentis.com] and here [ffii.org].For information on her other claims, please read the the English translation [ugent.be] of the letter I sent to most Flemish MEPs, as well as this short overview [ugent.be] of why software patents are bad.
Thanks for writing your MEPs, and keep it up!
Re:Rpm find (Score:4, Insightful)
Um, Earth to TedCheshireAcad, come in TedCheshireAcad. The "free software" movement is a social movement-- everything that happens in the movement is a political act. Just writing software and giving it away is a political act. Your concerns about your "clients" sounds a lot more like the rhetoric of the Open Source movement to me.
Besides, if you go to set up a "[GNU/]Linux-doodad for a client", maybe as a professional (and someone with half a clue) you should be prepared for network outages and things like that. Relying on a web site on the other side of the Atlantic is the worst risk management ever. You need to have all your software and tools readily available on CD-ROM, I think. I mean, were you going to install Windows over the net by just going to some web site?
Moderators: please mod parent down in spite of his request that you "do your worst". Notes like that to moderators ought to garnish at least a -1 just for putting that little challenge to the moderators.
Re:Rpm find (Score:3, Informative)
No, [s]he is not. The front page works, but statement is returned for any search query.
Re:Rpm find (Score:3, Informative)
Sign the petition (Score:5, Informative)
Details of the campaign against software patents can be found at http://swpat.ffii.org/group/todo/index.en.html [ffii.org]
Re:Sign the petition (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Sign the petition (Score:2)
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster.
So, if you want it to go into the public domain right now (instead of 70 yrs [95 yrs for an anonymous coward, if i remember correctly] after your death) you can do that. In fact, the best way to do that is to change your sig to "this post, in its entiret
no, email your MEP (Score:5, Informative)
If you live in the EU, don't just sign the petition - email your MEPs explaining why they should oppose the motion (and reminding them - gently - that they want your vote!). Yesterday I emailed all 10 MEPs representing London explaining my concerns, and I've already received 2 thoughtful responses -- one of which was seemed convinced by my arguments.
Probably the best arguments to use are those against patenting algorithmic business methods (also covered by the directive) rather than software per se, as they're more likely to be appreciated by politicians. My example was patenting an 'algorithm' that uses a number keyed in by a bank customer to verify their identity against the account details held on their bank card. Hey presto, your "software patent" gives you a monopoly on ATMs.
You can find a list of UK MEPs at the European Parliament's UK Office [europarl.org.uk]. For other countries, check out the main EU parliament website [eu.int]. Note that each constituency is represented by several MEPs, allocated between different parites by proportional representation. The vote on the directive is next week, so email your MEP today!
Re:no, email your MEP (Score:5, Insightful)
Emails and electronic forms don't have the impact of something in the "old fashioned real-world".
This is ridiculous (Score:5, Insightful)
So why in the hell are algorithms considered 'patentable'?
I can understand if they emulate a proprietary business methodology. Or an entire application (which really should fall under copyright law).
But patents?
Shakespeare was right. We should kill all the lawyers.
Re:This is ridiculous (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:This is ridiculous (Score:2)
This would be a dangerous point to raise in certain quarters. Wrap up the patent application in enough jargon, and the current patent office might well grant a patent now. Yes, I guess someone would be able to show prior art eventually, but this would probably be after a two year plus legal fight.
Re:This is ridiculous (Score:4, Interesting)
Lawyers aren't the problem (Score:5, Insightful)
I hate that phrase. First, lawyers don't create laws; Legislators/Congress(wo)men do (and judges interpret them). Secondly, lawyers' clients are the ones that hold the patents, not the lawyers. Thirdly, the USPTO (or the european equivalent in this case) is the one granting the patents. Lawyers are the middle-(wo)men in all this. Removing the lawyers won't solve the problem.
Sorry but I see people saying this all over slashdot. I think it's an unjustified statement that people like to throw out there when legislators make bad laws, judges interpret the law incorrectly, or the PTO grants patent they shouldn't have.
Anyone can be a patent agent. There is a separate patent-bar that just about anyone can take. You don't even need to go to law school or have passed the state bar exam.
psxndc
Re:Lawyers aren't the problem (Score:4, Insightful)
>I hate that phrase. First, lawyers don't create laws; Legislators/Congress(wo)men do (and judges interpret them)
Funnily enough, 39% [yourcongress.com] of Congress are lawyers. I believe that this is lower than usual. Perhaps some of them have been disbarred because of all the fraud, assault, drug use, shoplifting and drunk driving [lp.org] that they like to indulge in.
Lawyers and Congress are two sides of the same tarnished coin.
Re:Lawyers aren't the problem (Score:3, Insightful)
In your take on my analogy, you suggest asking a city planner or traffic engineer about a bridge. Both of these are people with training and experience in the question at hand, so if the question were about laws instead of bridges, they would be lawyers too. "Lawyer" encompasses a wide
Re:This is ridiculous (Score:4, Insightful)
You've just put all the small inventors out of the picture and restricted patents to those that already have a fair bit of disposable money to toss around. $100K for a patent application fee? Most legitimate small-time inventors have a hard enough time scraping together the $5-10K needed for a proper prior art search and other legalities. Good luck going to a bank and saying, "I need a loan for $100K, of which you'll get back $80K and maybe more if I can get a grant, and if the PTO finds prior art that we missed or otherwise turns us down you'll lose it all". Not gonna happen, and whoever modded this as 'insightful' needs a quick reality check.
Re:This is ridiculous (Score:5, Insightful)
Consider GIFs. The algorythm there was (I believe) non-trivial. It was developed twice (IBM and Unisys?) arround the same time and pattented twice (oops!). It was also discovered independantly in academia a few times around then (once shortly before, but not widely enough published to be prior art, once shortly after, doing no good).
So what did society gain for issuing a pattent on a (for practical purposes) new and genuinly nontrivial idea? Nothing whatsoever. We would have had the same algorythm shortly thereafter.
What did we lose? We suffered over a decade of uncertainty, danger, and incompatibility in web images, ameliorated only by the fact that Unysis valued public relations over squeezing every last penny. Had Unisys' profits gone SCO-like, it could easily have been much worse.
Software pattents are a bad idea because they don't work. Experimental evidence is clear: patents decrease technological development. Furthermore, programmers don't read patents; any benefit to be gained by learning about someone else's work that way is overwhelmed by the risk of discovering that your own work is patented by someone else. We don't need patents because barriers to entry are low. We don't need millions of dollars to test an algorythm, the way we do a medicine. Software patents just get in the way.
P.S. I realize I'm a little light on evidence. I'm too rushed right now to hunt down links. They are out there.
Microsoft wanted to protest aswell (Score:3, Funny)
Wine isn't closed - Slashdot isn't closed (Score:5, Insightful)
As has been said in previous article comments, SlashDot could close too, that would have a far larger ranging effect than Knoppix or Wine anyway.
Re:Wine isn't closed - Slashdot isn't closed (Score:2)
Could somebody with mod points please mark the parent as insightful? Thanks.
Close Slashdot (Score:5, Insightful)
If slashdot closed down in protest, there is a good chance that some news agencies would pick up that story. This would be good because it get this message out to people who don't normally visit slashdot, gimp, or wine hq.
Grow some balls slashdot. Shut your doors in protest!!
Re:Close Slashdot (Score:2)
Re:Close Slashdot (Score:5, Insightful)
If large sites start closing in protest, this story has a large chance of making it into the mainstream media. That will mean that people who don't usually visit sites like slashdot, gimp, wine, freshRPM will start to hear about software patents and why they are bad for everyone. They will see that the software community is not going to sit idly by while politicians take away our ability to develop software.
Slasdot's closing in protest would be a very good thing. It might even cause some people to venture out into the light since they will not have their favorite site to read.
Come on, say it with me. CLOSE SLASHDOT!!
It'll move these EU folks to write their reps. (Score:5, Insightful)
We need the EU folks reading Slashdot to get a jolt, to say, "Hey, this really is something Big." We need this, because this is the only way that many of them -- just like Americans -- will take the time to fire off their position to their representatives who have both the duty to represent their constituents and the power to stop this in its tracks.
And Slashdot, what is going to earn you more good will among your readership than taking a bold stand like this? Perhaps there would be more willing to subscribe -- at least for a month -- if they were to see you as politically active and not just a disinterested for-profit news portal.
C'mon Slashdot, even just a prominent alert that could stay at the top of front page. Isn't it for the good of everyone?
Re:It'll move these EU folks to write their reps. (Score:4, Insightful)
Why should
Re:Wine isn't closed - Slashdot isn't closed (Score:4, Insightful)
no it wouldnt...
all these sites closing are preaching to the Choir...
What needs to close down with a protest banner on the front page is CNN, MSNBC,GOOGLE,YAHOO.... sites that the general public looks at daily.
Shutting down sites that only those that already know the problem is really not effective..
so if you run a site that non-geeks use... Like a site about S10 pickup trucks, or how to repair your delorean, or underwater basket weaving... shut it down..
It's much more effective to force non-geeks to read about it than to simply inconvience those that already know about it.
Far larger ranging effect (Score:2, Funny)
Sincerely,
Goatse Man
Re:Wine isn't closed - Slashdot isn't closed (Score:4, Funny)
And soon after, heard like some weird air raid siren, from the all the unemployed geeks, "Noooooooooooo!"
Re:Wine isn't closed - Slashdot isn't closed (Score:3, Insightful)
Even though the parent is modded +5, pity we couldn't have the option to remove the cap.
As with other responses to this parents thread, even if /. closed for a bit or plastered a huge protest notice at the top of the site... this needs as much coverage as possible.
Plus, if /. shut down for a couple of days, we could get a break from the SCO stories and dupes... mind anything that removes SCO from the headlines for over a day must be a good thing.
Re:European patents != American patents (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyway, plenty of people outside the US have protested against the many moronic decisions taken there in recent years (DMCA, Skylarov etc.) - I'm sure there are plenty of people in the US who'd like to reciprocate. Stupid software laws are bad wherever they're passed.
Re:European patents != American patents (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:European patents != American patents (Score:5, Insightful)
Here is an example: although the GIMP web site is hosted in the US, several of the most active developers are living and working in Europe. So after some discussion with the other developers, I decided to close the home page of www.gimp.org [gimp.org]. Even if you live and work in the U.S., you could be affected because some software developed by many contributors from all around the world could cease to exist because of software patents affecting these developers.
Allowing patents on software and business methods in the U.S. was a bad idea. Several studies [researchoninnovation.org] have shown that software patents in the U.S. have had a negative impact on the industry. But so far, the damage has been limited because these patents are not accepted worldwide. So in many cases, a company that was more interested in litigation than real innovation was not able to sue the developers who (unknowingly) infringed on its patents because some or all of them were not in the U.S. But this could be different if these patents were valid worldwide (WIPO). The patent holders would have a bigger chance to hit the small companies and small developers, especially those working on Open Source or Free Software (because they cannot buy a license or pay royalties for all potential users).
This protest against the changes in the European law would also be a good way to promote a necessary reform of the U.S. patent system. A growing number of economists in the U.S. are raising their voice against the patentability of software. A clear sign coming from Europe could also help the U.S. industry in the long run.
Some people hide in their shell when their neighbors are threatened. Some people try to help them because they know that they could be affected directly or indirectly. The choice is yours.
Gimp (Score:5, Informative)
Qemu too... (Score:3, Informative)
It's closed too...
MRTG (Score:2, Interesting)
Noticed it yesterday (Score:2, Informative)
PicoSQL seems to be the home of an up and coming open source SQL server.
Freshrpms.net is also closed (Score:2, Informative)
I hold a patent (Score:3, Interesting)
Seriously though, does anybody have a link to the actual patents filed that contain references to "scrolling within a window", or "progress bars"? I'd be interested in looking over the legal ramifications in the US...
Re:I hold a patent (Score:2)
Seriously, I can see this getting old quicker than the "I, for one, welcome..." jokes.
RPMfind (Score:3, Informative)
RPMFind [rpmfind.net] and its mirror sites are closed as well. Not the front page, but after a search query you get the warning. They say it's temporarily though.
Re:RPMfind (Score:2)
Windows and Linux users should click with button-1. Mac users should be able to figure out for themselves which button to use.
What's the point of this? (Score:2, Insightful)
What message is this supposed to send? Why would the EU change its mind because a few sites decided to protest? How does the absence of a few sites hurt the EU? More likely, they'll only hurt themselves.
Re:What's the point of this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Kudos to SCO (Score:5, Funny)
SCO obviously felt so strongly about this that they got started a few days early! They're good folks, always doing their best for the community.
Economists wrote an open letter on the directive (Score:5, Informative)
gtk (Score:5, Informative)
Vote delayed (Score:5, Interesting)
Europe shows the US what to do... (Score:5, Insightful)
Come on guys, this is what the US community should have done to protest the DMCA, and the range of RIAA abuses that are being seen.
Lets not be silly and take it down for ever, but why not have an official protest day? Slashdot, Freshmeat, maybe even some of the Corporates.
And the time for this ? How about we start it on the same date as the end of the First World War ?
November 11th, starting at 11am GMT, for 24 hours, we declare the internet closed for business.
Are we in ? Slashdot.... are you listening ?
Re:Europe shows the US what to do... (Score:5, Insightful)
* Explain what is at stake for the common citizen.
* Explain who will use DCMA against them: RIAA, the porn industry and opportunists.
* Explain that there is no due process.
* Explain that your children are the target.
Re:Europe shows the US what to do... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Europe shows the US what to do... (Score:3, Interesting)
I say go for it. 2003.1111, 6AM EST 3AM PST, for 24 hours? Go for it! Everyone in the US rename your pages and slap up a simple INDEX.HTM, you can toss together in a minute with notepad. 24 hours, forget it, I'll have it up for 72
-uso.
Re:Europe shows the US what to do... (Score:2)
This protest is a EUROPEAN one. What I'm talking about is a US focused equivalent.
Many sites closed (Score:2, Informative)
Our feathered friends (Score:2, Informative)
www.apache.org [apache.org]
This 'protest' needs some HUGE commercial... (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, if Microsoft's European branch went off the web or Netscape or any number of other software companies that are BIG on the commercial radar were to join in on this protest, then more people would notice... But, that's not likely to happen...
I see this too often. We geeks, as a political body, are simlpy blind to reality. Most of the sites that are currently 'down' are only going to affect fellow computer geeks. We hurt ourselves more then we hurt the opposition. There has got to be a better way to actually take some ground in a battle like this one over software patents.
Who seriously came up with this idea with the honest belief that cutting off the Free Software community from Free Software sites would somehow affect the GREATER MAJORITY (That use Proprietart y software) that simply could care less about Free Software?
Re:This 'protest' needs some HUGE commercial... (Score:3, Informative)
Umm... Google owns software patents [uspto.gov]. Sergey is listed as an inventor. Other companies are now resuming the fight for web-search dominance, and this patent is part of Google's defense.
It means that no one else in the US can use their highly-successful ranking algorithm. Google stands to benefit greatly from software patents- I can't expect them to take such an expensive moral stand.
(Amazon.com CEO Jeff Bezos stood against software patents, even though his company benefits from them.
More sites (Score:2)
Knoppix Not Closed (Score:2)
Just click the hyperlink that says Knoppix on the page and you are in.
Total Commander has re-opened (Score:2)
mplayer and ffmpeg (Score:3, Informative)
An MEP Replies (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:An MEP Replies (Score:2, Insightful)
He thinks your concerns about the software patent directive are unfounded. He is certain (in his own mind) that the Directive will have no impact on software development, because it has "protections" to "prevent" "generic software patenting".
Basically, he is saying that he knows what is best for you and that you are full of crap. But, since he's a politician, he has to hide that under a mountain of words.
As a 'merican, I wish you the best of luck at saving you
Re:An MEP Replies (Score:3, Interesting)
From Glenys Kinnock (Labour) I got a paraphrased version of one of the directive's author Arlene McCarthy's own (self-praising) letters which is already posted on seveeral mailing lists. (I doubt Glenys uses Google much, or she'd be a little more careful what she sends out.)
After receiving these two, I got seriously annoyed that this vague and partial directive would pass due to a mix
Re:An MEP Replies (Score:3, Insightful)
That letter reminds me of a poor student essay, lots of buzzwords, no evidence of understanding, and no sign of any original thought. Take the phrase "makes it clear that only software which forms part of a technological process will be patentable." Can anyone tell me of any software that doesn't form part of a technological process. Clue, any piece of software run on a piece computer (i.e. a piece of technological equipment) is transformed into a process.
Now look at this bit, "This will allow Europea
Listing of website participating in the action (Score:4, Informative)
Meaningless sites (Score:3, Insightful)
Bit late ... (Score:2, Informative)
The Ant Project as well (Score:2)
Although, it looks like this was only supposed to be on August 27th, but they have kept theirs up.
don't get me wrong, i think this is great but... (Score:2, Insightful)
sure us nerds know about it, but joe public or mr european parliament bozo? don't fink it's gonna change their day.
but still, kudos to the sties that did.
Mplayer (Score:2)
Apache Software Foundation page (Score:3, Informative)
Sigh... they had to choose the last bloody day I can download anything before I move (after which I'll be without Internet access for a week).
(Then again I can probably hold off on installing a webserver until my net access is back.)
Re:Apache Software Foundation page (Score:3, Informative)
That's because it's not. Their front page talks about the issue, but then they have a continue on to apache.org [apache.org] link which takes you to index2.html. This is also the case on their sub-sites, like httpd.apache.org. If you click on that link, you'll see that the Apache site is there. Sometimes we do need to read beyond the first setence of websites, even if this is Slashdot.
List of Online Demo Partner Sites (Score:2, Informative)
Join in, and contact your MEPs if you are a citizen of an EU member country.
Will shutting down sites matter? (Score:5, Insightful)
As long as it's not SlashDot.org (Score:2)
Change the Law (Score:5, Interesting)
While it focusses on reforming copyright laws, most of what I say applies to patents. Note that in the U.S. at least, patents have the same legal foundation as copyrights, being authorized by the same clause in the Constitution.
The steps I suggest are:
- Speak Out
- Vote
- Write to Your Elected Representatives
- Donate Money to Political Campaigns
- Support Campaign Finance Reform
- Join the Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Practice Civil Disobedience
Well I don't think the EFF deals with patents but they do a lot of other good work.The above article is going to be put under a Creative Commons license to encourage copying as soon as I have the final draft done. I expect that to happen this weekend. So check back and copy the article to other websites when it's ready.
Also I closed my consulting business website [goingware.com] a couple days ago and will keep it that way a couple more days.
While I don't get a huge amount of traffic to my homepage, I also don't expect most of the people visiting it to already be free software enthusiasts who know all about the patent controversy.
What about a "Thought Bank"? (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe this is totally naive, but what if we setup a "thought bank". Most patents holders need to show their idea was theirs first don't they? If someone else can show prior art (ie. newspaper article, widely available source code, etc, anything to prove that someone else thought of the idea first) then the patent is invalid.
People who think of an idea who don't want someone else to patent it can describe their idea in the thought bank. It would then digitally sign the idea and post it for search engines and archive.org to catalogue it, and thereby providing a central place to create "prior art".
Any comments on why this is a [good|bad] idea?
(and just so you know, I'm patenting the idea of a "thought bank"...just kidding
Is This Really Effective? (Score:3, Interesting)
Don't get me wrong; I'm against software patents too. But this seems no different than if, say, abortion clinics closed their doors to protest potential anti-abortion legislation -- it's going to make the other side happier, and I doubt anyone in the EU would even notice. Frankly, I think all this is doing is inconveniencing those in the OpenSource community who are trying to download the programs, forcing those who really need it to find a closed-source (and patented!) equivalent. They're hurting their cause, not helping it. The petition someone here linked to would be a far more effective way of protesting.
The coming Digital Dark Age... (Score:5, Funny)
Free software goes underground. Geeks start sharing software through encrypted peer to peer networks. Non-geeks end up buying high priced crud from M$.
M$ and the RIAA companies get richer, and root out the last vestiges of free software on the net. Geeks build elaborate screen savers that look like a M$ windoze box - for when guests are around, but run Linux and free software underneath the hood.
The Senate convenes a new 'Un-American Activities' commitee, and brings prominent geeks in for public 'questioning' (ridicule). These geeks are blacklisted, and can not find work. This serves to make other geeks 'tow the line', or at least pretend to.
After a decade of low wages, persecution, and social programs intent on 'Microsoftizing' the populance, the well of available geeks runs dry. Geeks, themselves, no longer pass on the arcane subjects of computers to their children, instead opting to teach them candle making, and send them to seminary.
Over the next 20 years all remaining geeks retire from the workforce. There are no new systems built. All existing systems are kept running by non-geeks who use cargo-cult methods, not really understanding how it works. If a system breaks down - it does not get fixed. Slowly the network deteriorates; world wide communications become extinct. The Digital Dark Age lasts for ten thousand years, until some proto-geek reinvents the computer and the silicon chip.
Is this the future we want for our children? Make a difference - now!
Not just a handful (Score:3, Interesting)
companies doing the same.
Self-generated protest? (Score:3, Funny)
It's up right now. Perhaps if enough slashdotters could visit them [sco.com] and help them protest a bit more?
This isn't about Open Source (Score:5, Insightful)
It is, but the problem is bigger than that. Software patents are a threat to Open Source in much the same way that nuclear war is a threat to beekeepers. Almost everyone who writes software has this sword hanging over their necks, the only real exceptions being people who are at companies who have large patent portfolios and can cross-license. Those programmers are a minority.
I develop and maintain proprietary software for a living, and like every other programmer in the world, I have no idea how many patents I routinely violate every week. The only reason it hasn't been an issue (so far) is that our source is closed so it would be pretty hard for a hostile outsider to know what patents I violate, too. But if there ever were a conflict that somehow resulted in us having to reveal our source, the risk .. well, the risk is
unknown. And that's pretty scary.
A litigeous situation like that is unlikely because we're so small and our competition isn't very heated. No one has much to gain from harming us. But I can easily imagine situations where larger companies who are battling for big stakes, could find patent violations in one another products. (Look at how IBM responded to SCO. Never mind that SCO were the bad guys in this fight -- IBM could have done that to anybody.)
The kind of patent violations I'm talking about aren't "IP theft" or lazy followers copying true leaders' work. It's just people doing their jobs and solving problems the way any programmer should solve problems. Problem solving is what we do every day. And it's not like we're all these brilliant Edisons and Franklins who are inventing these insightful things all the time; it's just that with software, there's a simple process (that does not require genious) for arbitrarily piling layer upon layer to create immense complexity. And whatever you come up with, there's a reasonable chance that someone might have a patent on it. This is not what patents were intended to cover!
Anyway, what I'm getting at is that most proprietary and internal services programmers should be just as concerned about software patents as Free Software and Open Source developers. This is a much bigger problem and I think the publicity needs to get that message across.
If slashdotters really want to have an impact (Score:3, Interesting)
Accidentally hit reset on a few well chosen machines all at the same time -- say maybe midnight GMT tonight.
I bet the shock to the Internet would be nothing compared to the political earthquake of headlines reading "Slashdot readers bring down Internet in protest over software patents."
Patent/Copyright ... outdated (Score:3, Insightful)
Today, the issue is a real mess.
Software-
Software is a written work that becomes a machine when compiled and executed. It is a work that spans the two and should clearly have it's own category. Software patents for REAL innovation is appropriate. However, applications of derivates of well known concepts are simply not deserving of 17years of exclusive use.
I once had a colleague who had effectively patented the bit. Basically he had determined a scheme by which a record would either be a "summary" or a "detail" if a bit was switched. They actually successfully sued AT&T and succeeded in getting royalties.
While the use of such a technique does show a level of adaptivity and creativity, it doesn't rise to the level of "NEW IDEA". Certainly not one warranting 17 years of exclusive rights. The fact is that fundamental computer science is MEANT to apply to a limitless number of scenarios.
As far as copyrights go, it's pretty foolish to copyright something that you don't publish. Software code is virtually NEVER published. It's really a bad fit for copyright as no-one has a clue as to whether they did or did not infringe.
Clearly a new classification of intellectual property is needed in this category.
Bio-Tech-
A tremendous new force is emerging to literally turn biological information into machines. The pharmeceutical industry has existed for nearly a century treating drugs as "inventions".
The thing about modern pharmeceuticals is that their is way more at stake than the invention itself. Pharmecuetical production involves
1) Identification of a substance (or class of substance) that produces specific effect in anatomy.
2) Processes to synthesize that agent in a manner that is cost productive.
3) Development of an appropriate delivery agent.
4) Clinical trials to determine the efficacy of the product so that it can be marketed.
Each of these steps require uniquely different skills and techniques. In a way, each represents a uniquely different type of intellectual property.
Furthermore, when we look at the real "new age" biotech, there core product is often "knowledge". For example, knowledge of the human genome and how individual genes effect human anatomy. Our law is now recognizing the patent of individual "genes". Those are FACTS.
Patents aren't supposed to recognize scientific facts and truths, only inventions. However, patents are now issued to biotech firms for the knowledge of functions for individual genes or clusters of genes.
Clearly this fundamental research is a form of intellectual property. But it clearly IS NOT an invention since the knowledge does not produce a workable product, device or machine. It certainly is not a copyright, only god could copyright the human genome
Again new forms of intellectual property law is warranted to account for expensive research. Such a research is VERY valuable to humanity and an economic incentive may clearly be warranted (though perhaps not 17 years worth of protection).
Beyond that, perhaps research that produces new uses for older "inventions" should be relevant. For example, pharmeceutical companies simply will NOT invest research into known substances going of patent. There is no economic motivation. Perhaps a "IP" that would allow royalties for NEW uses of existing substances would be appropriate.
Another aspect of biotech firms is "process". The concept of "process" is embodied quite boldy in patents now. Though their relevance and applicability is often questioned. Indeed, I would claim that the a GUI software appli
Re:'Shut down' (Score:2)
Re:Hmmm... (Score:5, Insightful)
I've submitted 3 separate articles regarding EU patent initiative since 25th and all of them have been rejected. This is just another case of ignorance on part of American OSS supporters ignoring what goes on outside of US, and later bitch and moan for years why the laws are unjust.
For fuck's sake, I live in California and I'm horrified of the fallout that might result from this.
You got my vote on this. (Score:4, Insightful)