NewsForge On U.S. Advice To EU On Software Patents 221
An anonymous reader points to Roblimo's "interesting article about how the U.S. sold out to software patents and the EU should as well." Should be of interest to Europeans, forced as they are "to suffer from willy-nilly software development by individuals who have not been screened, approved, and trained by corporate human resources professionals."
Jury's Out. (Score:5, Insightful)
On the one hand, like the article mentions, Europe has a lot more socialists who aren't fans of Big Business. And they were the people who were actually able to succeed in nailing Microsoft with that big antitrust fine. (Sure that's not patent per-se, but given that every second slashdot and fark headline these days is a new rediculous MS patent, it fits.)
On the other hand, speaking from Ireland, multinations with lots of patents like Microsoft and Intel have become rather cozy here, but the tax breaks that used to be unique to foreign companies settling are disappearing from here and being imitated elsewhere. I know the local government in Ireland would be open to US style patent laws if it will keep foreign investment and jobs coming in.
Re:Jury's Out. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Jury's Out. (Score:2, Insightful)
"There are already patents being granted so we'd better make it legal"
It is just wrong in so many ways I couldn't even believe it.
Re:Jury's Out. (Score:2, Informative)
The majority of those patents have been filed by non-EU-companies, and even most of their claims are just based on the line "we managed to patent this in the US, so acknowledge this patent for the EU as well".
As the european patent office gets money for issuing patents and not for giving out legal advisories, they issued those patents.
If those patents were actually set in place, most EU comp
Re:Jury's Out. (Score:4, Insightful)
No country can survive indefinite foreign investment. Some is good, but things have gone far beyond "some", for Ireland, England and many other nations.
It's a standing joke that the only road car actually made in the UK is Japanese. For a country that once prided itself on the works of Jaguar, Rolls Royce, British Leyland, Rover and Granada, that's been no small collapse. British shipyards lie derelict, with all the jobs overseas. Britain is a rusting hulk, with little left that's native and functional.
To get back to the patent topic, the situation can only get worse in the EU, if software, algorithms and business models can be patented. It's far too easy to get such patents in the US. Dangerously easy. As the blizard of US software patents worsens, EU companies will find themselves legally barred from competing on any front.
The EU may see this as easy money, but the reality is that it might as well collectively agree to gas the whole of Europe. It'll be quicker, less painful, and less stressful on the unemployment figures.
Re:Jury's Out. (Score:2)
So Hitler wasn't a madman after all!
Re:Jury's Out. (Score:3, Informative)
Socialists, bah! There are plenty of MEP hopefuls who are against US-style software patents; you should be able to find one who espouses your other political convictions as well. If you're Dutch, check here [www.bof.nl] for a ranking. All Dutch MEPs, except the ones from one party, voted against overly broad software patents, so take your pick. The one party that voted for software patents is the VVD party to which Bolkestein belongs. If you remember
Green Party. (Score:2)
The strongest party in the UK against Software Patents is (as usual) the Green Party.
A quote from the party:
The GP strongly opposes software patenting. Copyright works well enough to protect IPR (Intellectual Property Rights). The flag of IPR must not be used to give more power to rich corporations while preventing the general use of useful cheap software.
Google for more info, but a couple of links are here:
http://www.greenparty.org.uk/index.php?nav=articl e s &n=68>First Link
Second Link [linux.org.uk]
Re:Jury's Out. (Score:2)
Big Business gets lots of perks and handouts from the Government. (patents, limited liability, public resources, free roads, free educated workers, free military action, tax breaks, government funded R&D, protective regulation, tarrifs, etc, the list goes on and on).
'Advice to the EU' (Score:5, Insightful)
And secondly, why doesn't the EU want advice from the guys down in the trenches? Is it impossible to get some body of government that listens to the people instead of greedy corporations who pay them off?
Yea, well. We can all tell I'm high. A government for the people? Pfft. I must of taken some baaaaaad LSD.
Re:'Advice to the EU' (Score:3, Insightful)
"Advice" in political terms is usually another way of saying "veiled threat". Many of the companies pushing for software patents are American. Big EU software houses like SAP *don't want them*, but the US is trying to look after it's own big IT businesses. If EU doesn't bend over, there may be trade or policy repercussions.
I didn't RTFA, because the quote made my knee jerk and my brain think OFFS! "to suffer from willy-nilly software development by individuals who have not been screened, approved, and trai
Re:'Advice to the EU' (Score:2)
And yet somehow you and the parent post seem to have missed the sarcasm contained therein.
EU and American relations (Score:2)
European elections (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:European elections (Score:2)
In short, they are a bunch of raving loonies. Should fit right in with the rest of the politicians...
Re:European elections (Score:2)
Actually, this is a good idea - we are way too dependent from centralized power and water systems, making us far too vulnerable to accidents, natural and otherwise.
For example, here in Finland the autumn storms black out large areas each fall, and because the power companies can't be bothered to hire enough people, it takes weeks to rep
Depressing issue. (Score:5, Insightful)
And this is to say what? That corporate human resources "professionals" know anything about software development? I suppose the next thing they'll believe is that programmers who learned to program in school know anything about programming.
I have some experience with that second one. I know a few people who studied programming in school, not really knowing anything about it beforehand. The way they studied made no sense at all; it was a process of memorization, like memorizing a multiplication table. This applies to everything from language syntax to design patterns. These schools turn out programmers who think they're hot stuff because they can churn out word processors using VB#.NET or whatever. There isn't the sort of deep-rooted philosophy about software design, the base in mathematics and logic, the science of the machine, or the art of putting together computer programs that accomplish a job, scale well, fit together within the overall field of computing, and age well too.
I don't know what to think about this industry. What happened to the few really good programmers who could make amazing things happen with a basically crappy machine with barely any memory or other computing resources? What happened to the respect that used to apply to this field? Nowadays, it seems like corporate managers look down on the programmers and the software, as if it's a given that software is some mindless trivial crap that takes two seconds to bang together, and the fact that it takes a really long time to engineer is scorned and look down upon.
The issue of software patents stems directly from this. There is no issue of learning or advancing the field. It's simply looked upon as a bunch of flash cards that need to be memorized, and each corporation is trying to jump on that and patent as many of those flash cards as they can. Want to use a 'switch' statement? Pay $500 per application instance, or an annual fee of $5,000,000. It's just a nominal fee...
Depressing. Free software needs to win the software war as soon as possible.
Heh... (Score:3, Funny)
followed by
In memory of Ronald Wilson Reagan. We will never forget you.
Am I the only one who sees the irony here?
Re:Heh... (Score:5, Insightful)
(Besides, it'll be hard to forget him, no matter how hard we try.)
Back to the issue at hand...
Software/Maths patents cannot co-exist with Free Software. Ether one will survive and the other will die, or both will destroy each other in the fight.
Patents of any kind no longer serve the purpose of protecting investment, as you can patent ideas that you have no intent of ever turning into anything real. So-called "Defensive" patents. With the minimal screening, you don't need to provide any evidence the idea would even work. Just front up the cash and take your turn in line.
This kills innovation, for two reasons. First, nobody else has any incentive to actually build the damn thing (and risk being sued to oblivion). Second, the patent-holder (if the patent is any good) can just wait until someone pays them royalties to implement the idea.
In short, unless a LOT of money is at stake (as in the pharmacutical industry), it's infinitely cheaper to collect as many patents as possible - like stamps or coins - on the off-chance someone else will eventually think the idea valuable enough to buy.
Look at the patent serial numbers, and compare that with the number of items you can think of that are sufficiently distinct and unique to warrant a patent for the idea.
I'm going to guess that the number of patents issued is maybe six to seven orders of magnitude greater than the number of inventions in existance.
Now throw in software and algorithm patents, where any process that can be formally described can be patented. In fact, not all descriptions are that formal. They just have to be descriptive enough to pass muster.
Software development on any scale will simply die. There won't be any point to it, any more. It'll either be done (and patented), or theorised (and patented anyway). Either way, smaller companies and garage developers won't have a snowball's chance in hell of surviving. Any more than garage developers and cottage industries have survived in the physical world.
It's not because they can't compete, or produce the work. It's because the initial costs involved are just too high. The hurdles are too great. The days when you could go into the shed and come out with a multi-million dollar idea (eg: Hewlett-Packard, Jobs & Wosnik, etc) are over. Not because - as Apple once claimed - it's all been done. No. It's because the right to invent has been killed, in favour of a right to stifle, plus the right to profit off marketroid daydreams.
Patents for hypertext? Patents for one-click purchases? Patents for list processing? Is this what civilization has come to?
Yeah, I know, I sound cynical. I probably am. I'm tired of the fiction we call the patent system. I'm tired of companies profiteering from obviously bogus patent and IP claims. These days, you don't invest money in the stock market, you invest it in the patent office!
The system assumes people will play nice. Well, they don't. It's time to retire a system that has been falling apart for decades, and replace it. I suggest using the toss of a coin. For a start, coins are cheaper. They'll also make the correct decision half the time. A much better score than what we have right now.
Re:Depressing issue. (Score:3, Funny)
That was the sarcasm in the line you quoted.
However, your exemplary slashbot behavior is sure to be rewarded, as from your post it's entirely obvious that you managed to avoid getting anywhere near the article, never mind reading it.
Re:Depressing issue. (Score:3, Interesting)
as far as I can tell, those are roblimo's words, not the words of any proposed legislation. Seems inflamatory to me (as evidenced the reaction you and I share) and smells like sensational journalism. I'd love to see a link to this in an actual proposal* or get some more info on it.
(*actually, I wouldn't like to see it in the proposal, but I would like
Re:Depressing issue. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Depressing issue. (Score:2)
*example: "some of our industry leaders are working hand-in-hand with the European Parliament to help you get software patent legislation enacted" had a supporting sarcastic link
Re:Depressing issue. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Depressing issue. (Score:5, Interesting)
Point of the post: I got responses ranging from I hate it to this assignment made me want to be a CS major. The people who were interested in CS/math/sciences loved it because they got to do something fun fairly simply. Those who were taking the course to fulfill a requirement or to dabble in programming hated it because it required them to deal w/ creating their own class and some math (fill an array with samples of a sin wave) and other stuff that required some thought/learning. They much preferred the assignments I hated that involved no creativity/original thought and were rather boilerplate. A lot of people (even really smart people) don't like being forced to think and much prefer memorization to critical thinking/problem solving. That's why, IMHO, many programs don't teach concepts (it disgusts me that in engineering classes the profs are "afraid" to give mathematical proofs for things b/c so many students hate them) or foundation - because too many people hate it and shy away from courses that focus on things that can't be crammed for and require understanding.
Re:Depressing issue. (Score:2)
Re:Depressing issue. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Depressing issue. (Score:4, Insightful)
From my experience at university, I'd say that they all went into university teaching/research and/or consultancy and if they became contractors in the UK, they are unemployed.
Corporate directors are under pressure from shareholders to maintain the mandatory annual growth rate. With the large number of graduates with 2:1's and 1st class Honours, companies were instructed to do all they could to give them employment. So companies stopped looked for contractors and just wanted project managers to train up the graduates. And even then, they will only consider graduates who have already done similar work as a project. Anyone who worked as a contractor, or wasn't willing to remain for a full project lifecycle and let their skills become out of date, is being rejected. But these are the same companies who would probably downsize their project managers, once their graduates were skilled enough to become team leaders.
Re:Depressing issue. (Score:3, Insightful)
In other words, the shareholders and managers of corporations believe:
In other words, co
Re:Depressing issue. (Score:2)
Investors like to see companies become 'cash cows' [investorwords.com], and become frustrated when they find out various markets are really cottage industries [investorwords.com], or if government regulation forces them to become 'boring utilities'.
You'll find that all the people who care about quality programming/design are either working as architects or running their own companies.
Re: It is... (Score:2)
Much of it is mindless trivial crap. We have Microsoft, at least in part, to thank for this, a la Visual Basic and its other "visual" stuff. This phenomenon is a natural consequence of a process that has been dumbed down, and fu
While we are in court (Score:5, Insightful)
the Chinese, Indians, Asia, S-Americans, Africans
are busy laughing at us, innovation wont stop but western buisness might
so i for 1 welcome our new technology masters
Re:While we are in court (Score:2, Interesting)
Patent1 [ic.gc.ca]
Canadian Patent Search [ic.gc.ca]
So sorry, Canada has software patents...
The corporations take credit for government (Score:3, Insightful)
In other words, the corporate lobby that wants these patents is basically taking credit for innovation, much of which is payed for by the US government. They are using this as evidence that they deserve even more rights. There is no justification for giving corporations these kinds of rights.
Elections coming up (Score:5, Interesting)
Are there any slashdotters here that let their vote be influenced by this, and if so how ?
Yes. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Yes. (Score:1, Interesting)
And no one knows what a 'pay tent' is!?! This whole patent story has no connection to everyday life, and no one seems to understand or even care about the problems that could come from it.
Re:Yes. (Score:5, Informative)
Those are not mainstream as they usually hover between 5 and 10% of the vote. The larger Socialist and Conservative Parties never seriously dealt with Europe in their campaign - it was rather all about bashing the other party on a strictly national basis. No wonder voter turnout is going to be dismal once again
I originally intended to vote for the (German) Liberal Party. Out of habit maybe, since I usually vote for its French sister party, the French Democratic Union (UDF).
Then I saw their voting record on the software patent issue. Screw them, I'm going with the Greens this time.
A previous poster was modded down as offtopic for this, but offtopic it sure was not. Indeed, the Greens are the only party that has consistently opposed any kind of software patents on a European basis. Besides, by voting for the Greens because of software patents, you are also rewarding one of the very few parties that actually care about Europe.
Come to think of it, anyone know what happened to the voting records on the FFII website (http://www.ffii.org.uk/votes/swpat/)?
The URL now returns 404 Errors at this very crucial time!
Re:Yes. (Score:2)
Theoretically they still do, but in many cases they either don't actually understand the issue (the patent system is complex, buried in legal mumbo-gumbo and a long way down the list of the list of things Normal People - and therefore MEPs - are interested in) or they have been scared into the "some directive is better than nothing" position without realising that in this case "some directive" in any of its current
Re:Yes. (Score:2, Informative)
In the UK. (Score:2)
The GP strongly opposes software patenting. Copyright works well enough to protect IPR (Intellectual Property Rights). The flag of IPR must not be used to give more power to rich corporations while preventing the general use of useful cheap software.
The only thing I'll add to their words is that the Green Party traditionally does well in the European Elections, so a vote for them can make a rea
Election swpat coverage (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Elections coming up (Score:5, Informative)
In Germany the Greens and the Liberal Party (FDP) both announced to be officially *against* Software Patents. Also the left wing (PDS) is against.
These are the choices I did take into account - in my opinion if you want to be sure and you can live with their other ideas the Greens are the safest choice!
The others do not qualify:
Situation in the SPD (Socialist party) is about 50% pro-SW-Patents and 50% against-SW-Patents. I have the feeling they both want SW-Patents (for their large industry lobby) but likewise not the consequences of them. Since they cannot make their mind up, I need to put by vote otherwise.
For the CDU/CSU (Conservative party) the situtation is even worse, about 70% pro-SW-Patents and 30% against. Most of their MEPs are not well informed and tend to believe the party line (which seems to be mostly dictated by a MEP Wuermling - a strong supporter of Software Patents).
Wuermling also called the EU parliament 'uninformed and confused' (in which he is also a memeber) and praised the councils version of the directive loudly - in my eyes not someone you would want to see as qualified member of the EU parliament.
Re:Elections coming up (Score:2)
Erik Meijer has consequently voted against s/w patents. The SP also makes the most fuss about 'zakkenvullerij' (stuffing one's pockets) like fo
Re:Elections coming up (Score:2)
Since you really can't count on a single person to support all of your interests, and since political parties have much more influence in the parliament than individuals, I had to pick something to base my vote on. And I really really don't want a patent system similiar t
Re:Elections coming up (Score:2)
And I did vote against Software patents. (although there were some other issues where I also agree with the local green party)
Today you mean (Score:2)
Unfortunately in the North West they have rolled back the reform acts of the 19th century and got rid of the idea of a secret ballot. With a mass postal ballot a patriarch can just collect a load of ballot papers and fill them in himself.
Re:Elections coming up (Score:2)
As the others have noted, Greens are unique in that they have unified stance on this matter with good guys across whole Europe. And quite a few other things seem to be pretty nice in that direction.
Unfortunately, they're Greens. I can't stand their pseudo-environmental knee-jerk reaction against nuclear power and biotechnology, that has nothing to do with rational thought of real environmental issues and more with feelings. Loo
Re:Elections coming up (Score:2)
But that's the "main" voting, pre-election was everywhere last week, AFAIK.
If Europe allows software patents... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's a shame to see that this is almost definitely going to happen. With the abundance of bogus patents already granted in the US, it's only a matter of time before people start seeing obvious and old ideas being patented by corporations that exist solely to sue others into submission and profit from the legal entanglements while the lawyers are busy sorting everything out. I can't believe that Europeans would be so dumb as to bring this upon themselves, and can only conclude that the US is strongly pressuring them to come around to their point of view vis-a-vis intellectual "property".
Who's in the US pressuring Europe into this, why are they doing this, and how can we stop them?
Re:If Europe allows software patents... (Score:2)
As you would expect, the average European is just as clueless about software patents as the average American. I wish this was not true but it is. It's possible that there's a higher awareness within the political parties, but not necessarily in favour of the free software position. At least the European
Re:If Europe allows software patents... (Score:2)
Re:If Europe allows software patents... (Score:2)
The real place to start is this weekend at voting booth.
Excuse me? (Score:5, Insightful)
Ultimate in irony! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ultimate in irony! (Score:2)
The whole point is "screw you, kid; I've got mine!".
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously, Corporate America has to stop this (Score:5, Insightful)
I personally wouldn't mind software patents if they were truly fundamental breakthroughs or such (RSA cryptography comes to mind), but with Microsoft patenting "To Do Lists" the EU should be really concerned over what kind of silliness is going to be submitted as a software patent.
For that matter, if the EU was to adopt software patents, what % of those patents would be American?
Should the EU choose not to adopt the software patent idea, we'll see the EU become the hotbed of software creativity for the next 20 years. That's something that'll rankle America, but will it bother the U.S. enough to suffer the pain of changing the patent law?
Re:Obviously, Corporate America has to stop this (Score:2, Interesting)
About 65%... I don't really need to comment beyond that, but let me just say it sickens me how willing my "fellow europeans" are to sell me down the river.
Re:Obviously, Corporate America has to stop this (Score:5, Informative)
Chuckle. Take a look at the original RSA patent. [uspto.gov] They don't even get to the RSA encryptin until the SEVENTH claim. Claim one (the root of the patent) is on the very idea of public key cryptography.
Even once you do get down to claim 7, it's still a patent on the "invention" of doing math. Groan.
-
Re:Obviously, Corporate America has to stop this (Score:2)
Worse, the basis of RSA encryption is the difficulty of solving a math problem (factoring) that mathmeticians have studied for years. The inventors certainly had an advantage, in that lots of study on how to factor had already been done. Yet, when they do similar work, they expect that no one else will be allowed to use the knowledge they developed. Seems a bit hypocritical, to me.
Re:Obviously, Corporate America has to stop this (Score:2)
Get real, we're talking about the western world here, not the third world. Still remember Bush's steel tariffs? Remember how EU gave him an ultimatum to get rid of them? And how he dropped them just days before the EU counter-tariffs were to take effect? And the absence of US CVBGs off the EU coasts?
--
Slowing Down = Good for Open Source (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, the fact that patents cost money can lead some software projects to open source licensing directly in order to ensure protection. I see this as good for the open source community, but bad for the software industry. Although, maybe I am misunderstanding the article.
On a side note, if you like the stock market/day trading/momentum trading/swing trading, I have built a website which showcases my paper trades. Everything is free of course, so please check it out - GroupShares.com [groupshares.com]
Thanks,
Aj
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Slowing Down = Good for Open Source (Score:2)
Until you infringe on one of their patents...
Re:Slowing Down = Bad for everyone (Score:2)
So sure, you can write applications free of patents with a great open source license, but you still can't write code that uses someone's patented "idea."
I think it hurts Open Source. Whereas Microsoft can purchase an expensive license to use someone's patented idea, Open Source projects can not.
Because, you know, HR people can REALLY pick em. (Score:5, Insightful)
Open Source development, however, is PEER reviewed. The bullsh*t walks, in any project of a substantial size and momentum to produce, say, an office suite. Someones screws up enough times and they get kicked from the project. Peers have the actual knowledge to say, this guys work is crap. HR can say, well he showed up in a clean suit with a good haircut and had a great handshake. Thats real nice, but Ill take the open source software anyday.
Half the reason proprietary software sucks, aside from not being free, is that its written by the guy with the best handshake, or whatever cosmetic thing the HR weenie was looking for that day. Never trust a bureaucrat HR rep to make a decision that a peer could make better.
Re:Because, you know, HR people can REALLY pick em (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Because, you know, HR people can REALLY pick em (Score:3, Interesting)
1. People seeking work and willing to lie, cheat and steal to get it.
2. Internal policies that are frankly illegal, if not outrightly immoral.
We ask (or demand) that HR vet the population which has members representing force#1. That alone is quite stressful, and with all the law governing the selection process, we arrive at force#2. Let's face facts; managers don't willingly do things like
Re:Because, you know, HR people can REALLY pick em (Score:2)
Re:Because, you know, HR people can REALLY pick em (Score:2)
Whenever I had any input, basically we used HR to tell us whether the person was kosher in general, and our own determinations as to whether they were competent...
There is only one way to deal with software patent (Score:5, Interesting)
But then open source developers often just don't get it either. OpenOffice for example doesn't even have a word count feature nor the ability to print multiple slides on the same page. These are two features that are absolutely critical in an academic environment for students. With academia firmly against proprietary software giants, we can use universities as a weapon against them.
We really need for a group like Knoppix to make a LiveCD with the ability to do a very clean, intelligent install to the hard drive. LiveCDs are the way to go for installations. The user can play around with them all they want and then ideally, just run an installer to copy it to the hard drive and configure the bootloader.
Right now we have about 1.5-2 years before the next version of Windows comes out. Now is the time for the major projects to conduct user surveys to find out what is missing, add the features and get the product out the door. The fastest way to take down Microsoft, the biggest threat on patents, is to make them stop growing their profits. Since the company makes a lot of its payments from stock, if we can stop them from growing, maybe even cause them to actually have slight negative growth, it would unbalance their payment system which would cause them to have to burn through more cash.
And as an aside, ironically to those who are thinking G-ddamn he is a socialist.... I'm voting libertarian in 2004.
Re:There is only one way to deal with software pat (Score:5, Informative)
That might as well not exist for most users (Score:2)
Re:There is only one way to deal with software pat (Score:2)
In copying M$ Office so slavishly, the writers of Star Office (and, by inheritance, Open Office) are copying what I consider to be an abominable UI.
Heh, I often used to wonder why the idiocy of if you want to edit headers/footers in Word, you have to use the view menu. Then someone explained it to me: WordPerfect used to have it like that, and back when WordPerfect was the dominant word processor, Microsoft just copied them to make it easier for people to migrate to their software. Then everyone learned w
Re:There is only one way to deal with software pat (Score:2)
ha! hardly.... universities love proprietary software makers. they pour tons of money into schools to get students hooked on their software. my school switched all of it's introductory CS labs over to microsoft visual c++ about a year or so before i started (over the strenuosu objections of many faculty and students) because microsoft gave them a really sweet deal. and i highly doubt that they
Re:There is only one way to deal with software pat (Score:2)
Personally, I have no idea whatsoever about what a Knoppix is. Or a Gentoo for that matter. Or a Debian.
And I'm not "joe public", I was using Linux professionally in '96! Yes, getting paid to run Linux as a full time job. I do know what I'm talking about.
The open source community, if it wants to make any inroads into public acceptance, has got to lose this obsession with stupid names. Microsoft learnt this years ago. "Windows", "Word", "Access", "
Makes me wonder (Score:1)
Software patents are good. (Score:2)
Posting from my Math Class... (Score:3, Funny)
Thank you for your consideration.
Re:Posting from my Math Class... (Score:2)
Then you won't have enjoyed them posting the Riemann Hypothesis proof article [slashdot.org] then ;)
it's been painfully obvious for a few years (Score:5, Interesting)
i think the first real attempt (or mockup) was certification of code which found its extreme in palladium. This principally technical solution has since been abandoned.
the current wave is based around so-called intellectual property rights. the term is a joke, but has many proponents, from the media industries through to the software business. you do not own that idea, it belongs to someone already. the space in your head has a 75-year lease.
this will also fail imho. it is - like palladium - too ludicrous a proposition and fails the basic darwin test: any society that allows its common technological culture to be partitioned into 'property' will suffer competitive disadvantage and eventually either change or die.
i expect the next phases to be based on security, but only after the current market leader is long dead and gone, its laughably insecure products being replaced with "professional" ones from other, older players.
who will, i think, be in the fore-front of the lobby to license software programming.
i've been programming for 20 years but i am very sure that my children will not be allowed to do this freely, any more than i can distill liquor and sell it to my neighbours.
software is just too fundamental, too valuable to be left in the hands of the common people.
Re:it's been painfully obvious for a few years (Score:3, Insightful)
Your misunderstand Palladium, it's not about code certification at all. Nor has it been abandoned.
The very reason Trusted Computing (Palladium) is so dangerous is because it uses the tried and true tactic of Embrace and Extend (and Exterminate). All software will run on a Trusted machine without any certification at all (embrace).
What Trusted Computing really does (extends) it allow t
Re:it's been painfully obvious for a few years (Score:2)
I wonder if there will still be some local ISPs that don't force their customers to "upgrade." There are still a few ISPs out ther that provide shell accounts. I pay more f
Re:it's been painfully obvious for a few years (Score:2)
At that point it becomes possible to implement the following rule:
Only permit connections to other Trusted Computers that enforce this rule.
If you install that rule on the backbone then the backbone enforces that rule on ISPs and IS
Depressing (Score:3, Interesting)
If everybody in the world lines up with the US system, in the end only Microsoft and IBM will be legally able to write code.
Maybe the solution is for all the open source programmers to form some sort of guild and patent every damn stray thought like the big boys are doing. That way we'll have leverage if they threaten us. We can even set up do-nothing companies to sue Microsoft for patent infringement every time they fund an SCO or AdTI, you know, like whacking your dog with a rolled-up newspaper. Baaaaad Microsoft. Whack!
We've herd this logic before ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Right now, they're trying to justify patents in the EU because of the great economic prosperity in the US. Unfortunately, it's not the first time those in the US has used this kind of argument...
To paraphrase "look at the great wealth and prosperity of the plantation system, the grand architecture, the vast and rich land, the free markets ... they paid for those slaves God blessed, surely that alone shows slavery is good, and the negros have been saved from their barbaric condition" ....
I wish I could say that patents are causing less harm, but when they recently lokcked out 10's of millions of Africans dying of AIDS from getting generics because "they had no incentive", because patents are "a property right", becasue "the wealth of the pharmasutical industry in the US is proof that patents work" ... etc. - it really causes me to think twice.
The people who know understand that the USA works because of freedom that exists inspite of patents, not becaus of them.
Stupid Question (Score:2, Interesting)
So if this is true (and it might be wrong, that's why I am asking) wouldn't a closed source company patenting something then make it's source open for all to see and look at?
Correct - explain - enlighten me, please.
Re:Stupid Question (Score:2)
You are perfectly correct in your understanding. That's the whole point of the patent system. If you invent something, you've got a "head start" in commercializing it. Either you can use it exclusively, or someone can read your patent, decide that it's a good idea, and pay you a licensing fee so they can use it too. Eventually it passes into the public domain. What the anti-patent crowd is arguing that it should pass into the public domain immediately.
What they do
Some Alternate History, Perhaps? (Score:3, Interesting)
Xerox could have sat on the idea, but sued Apple, Microsoft, and anybody else who came along with a use, into smouldering red-ink ruin.
The patent would have finally expired sometime around the early- to mid-90's.
Re:Some Alternate History, Perhaps? (Score:2)
But why would they? More likely, they'd simply have licensed the ideas in return for a fee. That, incidentally, is what Xerox, Kodak and a bunch of other companies do for a large chunk of their revenue. They do research and license it out. ARM is based on a similar model.
Willy nilly development (Score:4, Interesting)
I work for Siemens. A rather huge multinational based in Germany. That's Germany as in "right there in the middle of Europe". Maybe the neo-anarchist software developers of Antwerp and Barcelona are a different story, but the software developers from Germany are the epitome of "screened, approved and trained" mobile resources.
Tell a German that product is more important than process, and they'll call the men in the white suits to haul you away! To them, process is the product, and what you sell to generate revenue is merely icing on the cake.
Software Patents are good (Score:3, Insightful)
Like double-clicking.
Re:Software Patents are good (Score:4, Informative)
Spirit Vs. Reality (Score:5, Insightful)
Times have changed though and unfortunately they have changed for the worse. Now it seems that coprorations are using the patent system as a tool to stifle competition. The claims for patents are getting more and more vague, thus covering a broader and broader scope. In the not too distant past it would have been unheard of to pantent "Software Compression", it would be considered imprudent, where patenting as specific method of software compression using a specific library and a specific algorithm would have been ok. I think the current patent laws would suffice quite nicely if the US Patent Office would wake up and reject patents applications that are frivilous and obviously not in accordance with the spirit of U.S. Patent Law.
Re:Spirit Vs. Reality (Score:2)
". . . To promote the useful arts and sciences. . "
Anything more than that is influence peddling, and corporate welfare. Plain and simple.
American Lobbying Welcome (Score:5, Insightful)
That's not only because the American president is not particularly popular in Western Europe, so whenever Americans open their mouth, Europeans are likely to do the exact opposite right now.
It's also because even those who fight for software patents have to pretend they don't want the extremism that passes for patent policy in America these days. Even they must appear to oppose business method patents, for example.
That means that any open assistance American assistance for the project to sell out the European software industry to American patent holders will backfire. It will help the opponents of said project.
That in turn means that all opponents of legalizing software patents in Europe should welcome all the clueless interventions on part of the American government.
Radicals? (Score:2)
European free software advocates, Green Party activists, Socialists, economists, small business owners, and other radicals are working to keep the European Union from instituting U.S.-style software patents. But don't give up hope.
Radicals? Yes, those radical "economists", the horrible "small business owners", and Oh-My-God, the dreaded "free software advocates"! Horrors! No better than terrorists, most of them...