OT: Software Tax in Europe.

Guess if you write a SW macro in Europe from now on you will have to pay to patent it!

From: Mandrakesoft Team Subject: Mandrakelinux NWL: EU Software Patent Legislation: a real threat for Linux and Open Source Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 11:15:33 +0200 (CEST)

Flash: EU Software Patent Legislation: a real threat for Linux and Open Source

Mandrakesoft would like to alert all users and the software community at large about a recent clandestine attack by proprietary interest through covert adoption of EU Software Patent Legislation.

In direct contravention of the recent vote by the European Parliament to curtail Software Patents, the Irish Presidency of the European Union has surreptitiously reinstated unlimited software patent language into the text of a statement to be adopted by the European Council of Ministers on Monday May, 17th, without further debate!

The new text, if adopted, will extend Software Patents to every piece of software, including computer programs, data structures, and process descriptions. This will directly harm most software firms and all Open Source projects unable to pay patent licensing tribute, and amounts to an appropriation of the public domain by proprietary interests. A direct beneficiary will be a new class of pure patent companies without any real business or contribution to employment, which will use the threat of litigation to extort payments. Of note is that a sponsor of the Irish Presidency is Microsoft, currently building a large patent portfolio. If the Software Patent text is adopted, Microsoft may use this patent portfolio against Linux and other Open Source projects.

Mandrakesoft would like to forewarn and mobilize its users and the software community about the very real threat of such a law. Please contact the media, your political representatives, and your government, and urge them to vote against unlimited Software Patents and to revert to the previous European Parliament position.

For further information please see the following links:

formatting link
Mandrakesoft Online Team.

Reply to
P
Loading thread data ...

"P" wrote

Just to mention:

1) EU's proposal was (is) to mimic the US, who already allow to patent software, processes and such. 2) this has nothing to do with any "Tax" : the word doesn't appear in message body. 3) you have to pay to patent things, everywhere. 4) software was till now protected by the same "copyright" as artwork, which grants rights to the author and his family till 50 years after his death. 5) I'm eagerly waiting for the first trials on software patents. How many lawyers for 1 programmer ?
Reply to
Philippe Guglielmetti

Salut Philippe!

43 Lawyers VS. 1 Programmer

-> the odds have to be even.

:-)

SMA

Reply to
Sean-Michael Adams

Philippe,

If you read what the Mandrake guy is saying this new law will REQUIRE that every bit of software BE patented. In the US you don't have to patent anything. This law according to Mandrake will require patenting and payment of a fee to do so. This is kind of like paying to receive a television signal or radio signal like I saw when in Belgium.

Reply to
P

I can't spot this in the text...

Reply to
Philippe Guglielmetti

Philippe,

It is here, " The new text, if adopted, will extend Software Patents to every piece of software, including computer programs, data structures, and process descriptions. This will directly harm most software firms and all Open Source projects unable to pay patent licensing TRIBUTE, and amounts to an appropriation of the public domain by proprietary interests."

What Mandrake is say> "P" wrote:

Reply to
kellnerp

This means you CAN patent software.

This means Open Source projects (or users) can't include patented code without a license.

Sorry, I understand they say some pieces of programs MIGHT be patented (as currently in the US) and that they can't affort to pay licenses (or should I go back to English class?)

I suppose you are in mechanical engineering : do you reproduce parts taken from your competitors (patented) design ? Are you forced to patent your own designs ? So why sould it be different for software engineering ?

Reply to
Philippe Guglielmetti

Problem is, with the US system of patents, nothing even remotely similar would be allowed.

For example, what if, instead of just patenting a specific method of audio compression, had patented the process or concept of compressing audio? That would mean no OGG, no WMA, no nothing. Or for that matter, why not patent the concept of compressing mlutimedia?

talk about stifling innovation.

Do you think british Telcom should have a patent on hyperlinking? SBC has a (bogus) patent on what is essentially frames in any web browser (a display where one part of the screen stays stationary, while another section can scroll to show further information)--applier for well after NCSA Mosaic had that functionality. Someone else has a patent on what amounts to software RAID. And look at Amazon: patenting one-click shopping?! It's a freaking cookie for crying out loud!!! That's what cookies are SUPPOSED to do!!

oh! and this one: Ironcad has a patent (the salesmen told me so!) on the handles to drag the side of a polygon. Whoop-de-do. The Quake editors had that long before Ironcad came on the scene. You'll notice that SW is infringing this patent as well.

The problem is patenting concepts.

Just because you are the first to implement some design does NOT make it patentable. It's called just doing your job.

Think for a bit: Who is for patenting software? Who is against it?

For: Microsoft and other LARGE companies. Against: small companies. Where all the innovation comes from.

Patenting software in the manner allowed by the US will stifle innovation and only help the large behemoths of companies keep their market share without ever having to do anything really innovative. There wouldn't be any competition so why bother?

What if Sun had patented the whole write-once-run-anywhere concept? No .Net. No C# (or D-flat).

Besides, protecting software from being ripped off is why we have copyright?

How you copyright and patent something?

-nick e.

Reply to
Nick E.

...snip

And since all code will be patented there will be no more Free Software Foundation, GPL, etc. You probably won't be able to use examples from Kernigan and Ritchie without paying them a licensing fee.

What Mandrake is saying is that anybody who creates software, data structures, etc. MUST patent it and PAY for that patent. I understand that currently you or I can patent any software we write. Mandrake is saying there will be no choice. Software must be patented. If Dynabits writes code, Dynabits must pay for the patent on the code.

Reply to
kellnerp

formatting link
decent article.

and:

formatting link

-nick e.

Reply to
Nick E.

And the reason for all this is....you guessed it....

formatting link
Which well known company on this web site might be calling in a political favor?

Reply to
kellnerp

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.