Save the Web From Software Patents 127
TheNextCorner writes "PersonalWeb's software patent suit against Github and others threatens the freedom of the Web. In order to make sure that the Web can remain a free and accessible space for everyone, we need to rid ourselves of all the patents that threaten its viability. We need to end software patents."
Right... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Right... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Also, it's ok to write more than 3 sentences.
Says the guy who wrote 2 and 1/2 sentences....
Re: (Score:3)
Well, yes, but it is not going to be easy (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember that quite a few powerful companies have built their fortune on abusing the patent system.
Re: (Score:3)
Not going to be easy? It won't happen. Period. Too much money has already exchanged hands. Any solution to this nightmare will by necessity have to enable companies to retain the invested value of their patent portfolio and licensing while being universally applied to all jurisdictions around the world. It is the equivalent of de-weaponizing every nation-state, every NGO. In other words it's a pipe dream. Politicians could have nipped this in the bud maybe twenty years ago but now they are simply imp
Humans are assholes. (Score:5, Insightful)
Some humans really love getting more than they give, having lots of power over others and abusing it for the sake of abusing it, and so on.
The overwhelming majority of the rest of humanity likes being as lazy as possible in order to achieve their mediocre existence, never putting themselves out to change things that don't seem like they will make a really huge difference in their own lives. It is *so* much easier to let other people fight the important battles while watching TV and feeling smug after having voted.
The tiny remainder who actually care about justice, and about helping humanity achieve its full potential, are completely outnumbered (by the slothful) and outgunned (by the powerful).
Maybe we will grow out of this someday. Until then, expect widespread failure.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Somehow we still develop new cures for diseases, amazing new structures to live in, work in and travel over and through. We dream up and make various ways to communicate around the world instantly, to see all of our planet and always know where we are, to look billions of years into the past or travel to the oceans greatest depths just to see what's there, to land exploratory robots on remote planets, travel around our planet faster than the speed of sound, feed the vast majority of 7 billi
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The tiny remainder who actually care about justice, and about helping humanity achieve its full potential, are completely outnumbered (by the slothful) and outgunned (by the powerful).
Yes, but this is the remainder we refer to as, Mad Scientist, Evil Genius, Arch Nemesis, etc... It only takes a few of those to make big changes.
I'm one of your "remainder". For instance: Let's sterilize all the retards, and institude licenses and genetic screening for all births. Let's require IQ tests for Citizenship (and thus voter's rights). Let's throw out any Judges and Jurors that can't pass a quiz on the subject the're ruling over. Let's treat the populous like test subjecs: Why roll out a econ
Re: (Score:2)
As a Scientist I say: If the Patent System is beneficial, then WHERE THE FUCK IS THE EVIDENCE? Let's do a test, and see?! No, they say? Then they're insane! You don't have to be Evil or a Genius to realize we have ZERO evidence for or against patents being benefical.
All I have is your assertion that there is ZERO evidence. The common example of where patents are important is in the pharmaceutical industry. It is very expensive to develop drugs, but cheap to copy them once developed. We have seen many successful drugs developed under the patent system. There are counter-arguments against this, but to say that there is ZERO evidence is just a biased assertion.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, change will not come from people like the FSF. This is a MAD scheme, and with Apple and Google and others at each other throats, it has turned into a hot war. The difference is that here, participants can die or be severely crippled. If everybody was just protecting their own fiefdom, yes, nothing would happen. But if this goes on (and it will, because the players are incapable of stopping by themselves), the damage will grow so huge that it will become an existential thing for western civilization. Tha
Re:Well, yes, but it is not going to be easy (Score:5, Insightful)
I am beginning to believe that our screwed up patent system is the primary reason small businesses are failing to get started and why we're struggling so much to get out of the recession.
Re: (Score:2)
When was the last time any one of the moderators who bumped this all the way up to 'insighful' thought about starting a business and said "oops, better not do that... I might get sued for patent infringement"? I'm betting never. And if so, did they actually get an attorney do a search to see (or do a patent search themselves via the USPTO)? I'm betting that finishes off the entire bunch if any made it past the f
Re: (Score:2)
That would seem easy enough, every patent and copyright mark as a limited time frame already.
Just stop issuing new patents and stop extending the rights on existing patents and let those existing patents and copyrights run their natural course.
Companies don't lose anything that they already hav
The web? (Score:2)
I thought we didn't had them here?
Sounds like a US problem.
Doubt it would kill the web globally.
FUD ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Remember that quite a few powerful companies have built their fortune on abusing the patent system.
Yeah, those law firms aren't about to throw away their meal ticket ... or were you referring to someone else?
Re:Well, yes, but it is not going to be easy (Score:4, Insightful)
Move your company to Europe, do not trade with the USA, instead only trade with the mysterious entity know as the "rest of the world" which has a very large, diverse and robust economy and slightly less powerful corporations, laugh all the way to the bank ...
Re:Well, yes, but it is not going to be easy (Score:4, Informative)
Move your company to Europe, do not trade with the USA, instead only trade with the mysterious entity know as the "rest of the world" which has a very large, diverse and robust economy and slightly less powerful corporations, laugh all the way to the bank ...
There is an incredible push in Europe to pass software patents as well. It's been cancelled twice by a hair. But the European Patent Office has already hired people to take care of software patents. I know, I was one of the heads hunted.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:too much money in software patents for the lawy (Score:4, Insightful)
Any person is able to represent themselves 'pro se.'
And only a moron does in a patent case. The law is written to be byzantine and incomprehensible as a make work project for the lawyers, by the lawyers.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:too much money in software patents for the lawy (Score:5, Informative)
It's worse than that. The federal politicians are also mostly lawyers. Obama and Romney both have a J.D.
It's a monoculture, and I don't care how much you like lawyers, a monoculture is not good for the country.
Ok but (Score:2)
Realistically, how? The notion that an idea can be property is firmly ensconced in the Zeitgeist, and billions of dollars of wealth depend on it staying that way.
Who or what has the kind of realpolitik oomph to go up against that? I don't see it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
That's a design patent - not a software patent...
Yes - Europe has its degree of rubbish, but it is far from the total destruction that's starting to wreck the USA. As starting (software) company you are better off anywhere else than the USA, because you stand no chance against the patent trolls and patent Moloch's (like Micosoft, Aplle, Oracle etc.). And -strange enough- people are wondering why (software) progress and innovation seems to halt and the recession keeps on rolling forward.
So, if you want to st
Re:Ok but (Score:5, Insightful)
Show the US government that software patents hurt innovation so much that it causes migration of innovative firms.
Re: (Score:2)
Show the US government that software patents hurt innovation so much that it causes migration of innovative firms.
The problem is how? Enough words have been spoken with regard abolishing software patents some hysterical and many others logical however software patents continue to be given out with the result of billions of dollars been given to the patent lawyers and patent trolls, One possible way is for other countries to abolish software patents and don't export possibly infringing software to the USA. Easily said but in a global economy it is a brave company that can afford to do that.
Re: (Score:2)
Time to end patents (Score:4, Interesting)
I was convinced they were needed, if only for Pharmaceuticals, where the testing time is long but the time to copy short, but now I'm having doubts even there:
http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/against.htm
The test for me is the cure for aids vs the cure for limp penis. Patents simply haven't delivered a cure for a major disease in 30 years, they have however invented many ways to get a penis erect and a seemingly endless way to cure headaches.
US is stagnating, down from 1st to 3rd with China taking second spot on the exporters list. This I think is a direct result of strong IP laws.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_exports
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
More competition would fix that (Score:1)
That's because Pharma is a few players, and all of them make big money from keeping cancer patients and aids patients alive. For a cure, you'd need a smaller player without that vested interest.
As it is now, the only thing they're doing is researching and patenting around any possible cures to prevent that cash cow being taken away.
Pharmas problem (Score:1)
The lack of cures is simply down to the fact that most of the 'low hanging fruit' in terms of pharmaceutical treatments has already been discovered.
Also the costs of getting a drug approved has gone up and up. It is probable that some drugs such as paracetamol would not be approved nowadays either, at least not as available OTC (over the counter) without prescription.
AIDs is an extremely complex disease which shows some ability to adapt itself when under attack. No cure is likely to be simple
iPhone users talking about freedom? (Score:2, Insightful)
I wonder if all those people talking about software freedom use iPhones.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if all those people talking about software freedom use iPhones.
I love how comments like this get modded up, then later we get up-modded comments about how there's too much Apple hype.
Oh, and if there is a 'freedom' phone out there, it's not running Android.
I'm surprised... (Score:5, Informative)
that no one mentioned the very well written article posted on ArsTechnica yesterday about the patent system and the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. As expected, a very US-centric view on the problem, but it does raise some obvious issues. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/09/how-a-rogue-appeals-court-wrecked-the-patent-system/ [arstechnica.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
exactly!
if you wholesale replace a working (but admittedly faulty) system
I don't see a working system at all.
I see a system that has been abused beyond all recognition by a very small percentage of very powerful companies.
It's not even just the little guy getting screwed - its everyone but the fortune 500 companies, and even they've spent 100s of millions duking it out.
Re: (Score:2)
True, but how is that at all related to software patents?
Well, that's a little bit difficult to explain to somebody that thinks a patent should be invalidated because they saw something on Star Trek.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, I'll use a car analogy: The pressure in the tire is low, you don't need to invent a new wheel.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Close, but in this case, you've got four perfectly good tires, and the tire you think is low is actually an anchor tied to the back.
The mechanic put it there, serving his own interests. You're not up to speed on how the mechanics of a car work, so you nod your head agreeingly and take comfort in knowing that other similarly-educated people also believe him.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
First understand them, THEN make the judgement. Slashdot has not been educating you on how patents work... at all. They have been shocking you and watching their ad counter spin. It makes you feel like you're a master of the topic, but really it's a bit like filling up on a Snickers bar.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And how exactly are you coming by all these articles you're reading?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I'm just wondering if there's bias behind your choices in what you read up on. I mean, patents offering nothing of value at all is a rather extreme opinion from somebody using objective sources.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
20/20 Hindsight (Score:3)
We need to end software patents
I seem to recall that back in the day it was pretty fucking obvious what would happen if we allowed them in the first place. Fat lot of fucking good that did, however...
Indeed, SP are an undead horror and we knew it! (Score:1)
We need to end software patents
I seem to recall that back in the day it was pretty fucking obvious what would happen if we allowed them in the first place. Fat lot of fucking good that did, however...
Oh yes, I remember well the fear of software patents back in the day, and the big relief felt by most programmers when it appeared the issue was dead. Software was not patentable, the issue was settled, and the nascent PC software writing community heaved a sigh of relief went on about its business. It's worth noting that that was an era of absolutely stunning innovation, with new software ideas cropping up everywhere, seemingly overnight. Nobody worried about patents, and the industry flourished. And yet,
Re: (Score:2)
But but... prior art crowd source. (Score:1)
A patent in this case is rather specific and
is unlikely to have been implemented and not grafted into
a real product.
Rummage about your old notes and old email and find
where this "invention" was first discussed and published.
Note that git was developed as a reaction to someone stepping on ....
the cash flow of bitkeeper and friends. A Git2 that works differently
is possible
To me this is a normal and obvious extension of a unique hash lookup
table. It can be done at the end of a network link a fiber channel
o
What the patents actually cover - not the web (Score:2)
The oldest patent in the case is for de-duplication in storage using a cryptographic hash. Most web sites don't do that, although some caching systems do.
Re: (Score:1)
Stop allowing patents that are patently obvious (Score:1)
The "one-click" patent shows the key absurdity: almost every interaction on the internet (except for text entry) requires a response to a click on a link/hyperlink. (text entry requires a response
Texas (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Hi PersonalWeb employee.
Re: (Score:2)
You shouldn't be able to patent ideas. That's the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Fuck github (Score:4, Informative)
I have "invented" many things as have most people, but since I did them at work my employer is the only one who could patent them ,,,
Does this inspire me to innovate? Do I reap the benefits ...?
More to the point did the lack of patents stop people innovating before they were invented?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except that some forms of software patents do exist in Europe.
From Wikipedia:
"One interpretation, which is followed by the Boards of Appeal of the EPO, is that an invention is patentable if it provides a new and non-obvious "technical" solution to a technical problem. The problem, and the solution, may be entirely resident within a computer such as a way of making a computer run faster or more efficiently in a novel and inventive way[citation needed]. Alternatively, the problem may be how to make the comput
Re: (Score:3)
But other people feel entitled to create little monopolies for themselves using the government's power. That's okay, though.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The prevailing philosophy holds that Mathematics is discovered, not invented. This is especially true when referring to reality; if you can choose arbitrary axioms you might be able to invent things. Otherwise, your solution is dictated by your choices.
Even if what you say is true, though, that is not an argument for patents. Empirical studies suggest that patents are used mostly to stifle competition, and their mechanism is fairly anti-capitalist.
Therefore to the degree to which you support patents, you're
Re: (Score:2)
The prevailing philosophy holds that Mathematics is discovered, not invented.
That philosophy prevailed before the MP3 came along.
Re: (Score:2)
Everything in MP3 is either a storage format (C structs), or is based upon the orthogonality property of linear algebra.
Re: (Score:2)
You can describe any invention in a similar way.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Believe it or not, it is possible to build creative, novel, innovative, non-obvious solutions using only math and algorithms.
Unfortunately, a lot of these patents are not even close to being creative, novel, or innovative. There's a lot of obvious solutions that any expert in the software field would develop the same way, or at least an infringing way, if tasked with a similar problem. The language used seems to be aimed at maximizing the potential that someone will infringe on the patent in some way.
Re: (Score:3)
Programming is math, algorithms, nothing more. It's idiotic that you can patent an idea or algorithm. What's next, patenting + and - ? Or maybe Pi?
+ and -? No. Pi? No. A new algorithm for calculation of Pi? Perhaps. Not all software patents are bad but the bar is set WAY too low. At least 95% of all software patents should never have been granted.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's isomorphic to a mathematical operation, or sequence of them, then its bad.
That would be... oh.... all of them.
Re: (Score:2)
My argument is as follows:
A patent for "Doing some process the same way you did it before but using a computer" - Bad patent
A patent for "Doing some process on a computer which isn't blatantly obvious on how one would use a computer in the process" or "Performing a process that would not be possible without the use of a computer" - potentially not bad patent.
Even "Process for enhan
Re: (Score:2)
I have no problem with patents on processes that, by the mere act of performing that process, some effect upon the real world is produced.
I have a problem with patents on processes, no matter how obscure they are, or innovative they might seem to be, which do not exhibit any causal interaction with the world around us. Usefulness doesn't mean it is real. (Morality is a good example of this... "good" isn't a real physical substance, but behaving in a morally acceptable way still has a very useful fun
You are wrong in every conceivable way (Score:3, Insightful)
Your logic sucks. Mostly you repeat your premise. You are also as factually wrong as it is possible to be.
Physics, chemistry, and engineering can be modeled using math. The map is not the territory, however: we cannot make mathematically provable statements about reality using these models. For a more detailed view on determinism in quantum mechanics, and uncertainty principle, see elsewhere.
Computer languages are an extension of lambda calculus. Lisp syntax is extremely similar to lambda calculus. Algorith
No, you *both* are mistaken Re:You are wrong... (Score:2)
Furthermore, OP is wrong, as well. An algorithm is an *arbitrary* expression of a *creative* method of solving a problem. Your choice of the *expression* of that method is what is arbitrary; it's onl
Re: (Score:2)
All of programming comes down to functions. Functions are by definition math. If you don't understand that then you don't understand programming or math.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't patent a hexnut. I can't patent a screw. I can't patent a lever. I can't patent steel. I can't patent dirt or oil. All of these things are things that have either been patented and those patents have expired or they are natural. With me?
But I can patent an invention that combines t