This is the wrong message to USPTO
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| hkwint Dec 08, 2005 7:15 AM EDT |
If Open-Source organizations will submit software patents, Microsoft & Co , USPTO & Co will use this as an evidence, software patents are working out as should. Open Source organizations submitting patents, will only mean more software patents, and there are far too many of them already. Submission, or just using existing patents, also means aproval of the way USPTO aproves software patents, which is just what we don't want. Being one of the anti-swpat hardliners myself, I see this as contra-productive in our (Eupopean) fight against software patents. If some professor says we may not use the results of his reasearch, we shouldn't respond by forbidding him to use the results of our research. Because (university) researches/reports can always be used by anyone (call this reports 'open source'), science is at the level it is today; results of old research can be used in new research. Software patents prevent software from gaining the same level. Only a strong 'No!' will help against BS double click / sudo patents. If we use a partly 'No', pro-swpat lawyers and politicians will always find a way around, like looking at software as processes, or the community patents used by the patent-pro's in the EU now. Free software isn't about threatening large companies what will happen if they threaten us, it is about freedom, also for companies. Patents stifle innovation, no matter who submitted them. |
| Tsela Dec 08, 2005 1:27 PM EDT |
I would usually agree with you, and I am also a rabid anti-software patents advocate. But I find your position a bit easy to have in Europe where software patents are not enforcible. In the US, they are, and are enforced everyday. The protection is unfortunately necessary, and I'm afraid there is no other solution. Also, I disagree that it sends the wrong message. To me, it sends a clear message that software patents are harmful to innovation. Otherwise why would the most innovative part of the software industry need such constructions for protection? Also, even if pro-patent advocates use them to push their position, if those patent pools were absent they would use that fact to push away everyone from using Free Software because it's a patent risk. In both cases we lose anyway. And the pragmatist in me prefers the case where Free Software developers can at least be somewhat protected. Do you really think Microsoft & co would have any qualms suing individuals and pushing families to personal bankruptcy? I'd rather have that not happen. If that means patent pools, so be it. All in all, I don't believe patent pools send a wrong message to the USPTO or the politicians. And even if it did, don't forget who makes those patent pools. IBM may be our big friend right now, but they were also on the pro-software patents side in the European battle. IBM sees it can make a big buck out of Free Software and is just trying to protect the goose with the golden eggs. You won't get them to fight against software patents though. |
| hkwint Dec 09, 2005 6:07 AM EDT |
Generally, I also agree with you, which seems a bit contradicting, so let me try to explain: When lobbying against software patents, we (amongst others the FFII) thought, if software patents were 'abolished' in the EU, the same thing might happen in the US. Though even MS asked for a better patent quality in the US, people in the US didn't take that much action to get rid of the software patents. I hoped, US people would also start action by means of writing to their local politicians and attending discussions, but they didn't. So swpat are still enforcable in the US, and for the people afraid to be sued, this might offer relief. But it is very difficult to lobby against software patents while you are submitting them yourself, and by submission, you pay the USPTO money for their practices. That is just a difficult dilemma. So what I preferred was, OS organizations not putting their energy and efforts in the submission of any patents, but use that energy and efforts to get rid of the the software patents. This is probably idle hope, until people in the US finally see, their software is far too expensive compared to other countries, because 30% of the cost of US software will go straightly into the pockets of lawyers and the USPTO. Then, it is too late. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!