EU Software Patent War Ignites Again 168
pieterh writes "ZDNet UK has a detailed article on the heating-up of the software patent debate in Europe. A new motion before the European Parliament calls for a harmonised patent court (EPLA) that would be able to enforce software patents across Europe. This comes just 15 months after the EP rejected the infamous Computer Implemented Inventions directive." From the article: "Patents on software are formally disallowed under the European patent system, but are routinely granted by the European patent office, according to critics. They are currently difficult to enforce in many EU member states, something critics say would be changed by the failed software patent directive, and now by the EPLA. Software patents are generally considered to add to the legal costs of large enterprises, as well as creating a hostile legal environment for smaller software businesses and open source projects."
the best solution, obviously (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, because clearly the best solution isn't to simply fix the law, but to create an entirely new governmental bureacracy.
Sad, isn't it ? (Score:5, Insightful)
In rebuttal, the three groups have filed a motion calling for "balance between the interests of patent holders and the broader public interest in innovation and competitive markets"
Sad, isn't it, when the groups opposing this are calling for a "balance" between patent holders and the greater public good.
Surely, the whole point of patents was "the broader public interest in innovation and competitive markets" ?
So how can McCreevy and co. get away with opposing "the broader public interest in innovation and competitive markets", the will of our elected EU politicians, and the wishes of by far the majority of the population who have expressed an interest in the matter ?
Re:the best solution, obviously (Score:5, Insightful)
The law is fixed. The law specifically disallows software patents. The "infamous" directive mentioned in the writeup failed, so the law still specifically disallows software patents. The patent office issues them anyway. Isn't it funny how laws telling people what to do result in fines, jail time, and execution if you break them, but laws telling the government what to do have absolutely no punishment when the government breaks them?
So to enforce the patents, whoever is behind this clusterfuck intends to create an entirely new court system, specifically for the purpose of "legislating from the bench".
Why SMALL businesses reject software patents (Score:5, Insightful)
Welcome to Democracy (Score:5, Insightful)
I realize this is kind of a sappy/idealistic post, but, um, I think there's some measure of truth here.
Re:Why SMALL businesses reject software patents (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Welcome to Democracy (Score:5, Insightful)
For one thing, software already has copyright. Why does it also need patents?
Say I write a song with a I-IV-V progression. I have copyright on that song now. Should I also be able to patent the I-IV-V progression and begin suing everyone over it?
Re:international issues (Score:5, Insightful)
The answer is you sign a "free-trade" treaty to "synchronize" your "intellectual property" laws with the United States. Then you just do whatever the Americans tell you.
Re:Welcome to Democracy (Score:3, Insightful)
which is the same as saying you can't patent an algorithm
but you can patent a specific implementation of an internal combustion engine
which is the same as saying you can patent a specific use of an algorithm.
Your example is entirely consistent with software patents.
Re:Why SMALL businesses reject software patents (Score:3, Insightful)
Despite the ignorant opinion of a Judge, there is nothing patentable in any piece of code in and of itself. If the USPTO had a history of correctly, consistantly and properly doing their job, I might concede that its possible that when software is intimately embedded in a physical device that such a device in its entirety might be patentable, but it would have to be something non-obvious and provably absent of prior art, and not just "with a computer" or "over the internet" of some other solution. We in the US are already inundated with big business garbage sliding down THAT slippery slope and software patents have proven to be a decision whose negatives far outweigh the positives.
huh (Score:3, Insightful)
So basically you are a flunky who makes a living from the patent industry. That explains your hysteria: terror. Wouldn't it be horrible if we were free to think? Don't think about it before asking your masters at the law firm.
Re:Welcome to Democracy (Score:3, Insightful)
This approach is then a real problem. Do you really deserve to "own" the ideas in the patent you're writing? The second it's filed, how many real-world implementations out there are suddenly infringing because other developers had to follow similar logical processes to arrive at a solution that solves the same problem?
I can't help but think that the real innovators that advance technology in this world are disadvantaged, stifling progress - and that people benefiting from software patents who are irrelevant to technological progress are disproportionately advantaged.
Re:Welcome to Democracy (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I am apalled (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Nostalgia... (Score:1, Insightful)
Yeah, because all creative work just pops out of nothingness, without building upon previous ideas. Sorry, Google - the idea of a program that indexes web pages is patented. Please wait 50 years until Altavista patent expires...
Eh,,, (Score:4, Insightful)
It looks like we have won the battle, but the war will continue as long as there is overload of bureacracy in EU and moloch corporations to be lobbying.
Personally, being a Linux user (perhaps not the most advanced around, but at least trying) I shiver at the tought of software patents being introduced and what effect this might have on our distributions. No left-click, no double-click, no <insert_your_favourite_nix_feature_here>?
I do hope this issue will be bounced back again. For the sake of us all.