Patents and Linux

[Tobias Weisserth]

Hi Paul,

On Mon, 2004-05-17 at 19:17, Paul Thomas wrote:
> On 17/05/2004 09:21 WipeOut wrote:
> > Yes.. If the patent bills go through then it becomes law and anyone 
> > breaking the law goes to jail..
> 
> Wrong. Check the law.

If you're not able to pay for the "damage" you might have caused by
abusing patent related IP, then they'll put you behind bars ;-)

> > Also mobalising people behind a cause is hard enough so the chances of 
> > getting enough people behind it are pretty slim..
> 
> It seems to depend on which way the French vote. It could well go back to 
> the European Parliament.

The French won't say no to patents. The influence of the content and
software industry on the French government is just too strong.

Read the part "About the french letter" at the bottom of this page from
Groklaw:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20040513125154288#c134885

And in either case this has to go through a second voting in parliament.
There is no "It could well go back", there is only a "it will certainly
go back into parliament", because that's the proper working of European
legislation. The problem is though, that this happens after the
elections and who knows whether the new parliament won't have a mojority
in favour of software patents. Just have a look at polls and you'll see
that conservative, corrupt parties are on the rise again.

> The UK seem to be sitting on the side-lines on this one as the proposed 
> directive would require any liberalisation of UK patent law and UK patent 
> law falls well short of the width of US patentability (anyone trying to 
> tell you otherwise is either a fool, a liar or both).

Well, I don't know whether you have spoken to any of your political
candidates for the EP but most of them are in favour of software patents
and will probably vote this way (and have done so in the first hearing).
Just last week I was talking to Jo Wood (UK Labour) in person in
Brussels and she was in favour of software patents. She is by no means a
minority in Britain. The EP rapporteur on the directive is British too
and strongly in favour of patents. Britain is a driving force behind
software patents. Have a look at how British EP members voted in the
first hearing if you don't believe me. The British government will also
vote in favour of the new proposed directive.

> My reading of the issue is that the EP amendments were sufficiently narrow 
> to make some existing patents illegal

Those patents already registered aren't legal anyway since there is no
law that would enforce them if you fight such a patent. In a European
agreement on patents from sometime in the 70s software has explicitly
been excepted from patentability. The European Patent Office has acted
against the law by granting these patents.

>  and that's why they were dropped.

The amended version was dropped because national governments hold more
initiative power in the European organisations than the EP. The EP never
was meant to deal with software patents as it did in the first hearing.
In order to correct this "mistake", the council under the Irish
presidency issued another proposal and scheduled the second hearing to
take place after elections so that a new and changed parliament might
probably vote in favour of a stronger patentability on software.

It's not the European Parliament that controls or directs the European
Union. It's the assembly of the national governments, also known as the
Council of Ministers. European legislation is still a product of
national entities. So please don't be surprised if the Commission, which
gets nominated by national governments, tries to play tricks on the EP
and the council plays nicely along. That's the way it's supposed to be.
Not that this is what I prefer... In either case, the parliament gets a
second reading and let's just wait until then before we discuss the
consequences. There's a decisive election between that, so be sure to
vote for someone who is not in favour of patents on software. In the UK,
you'll have a hard time finding a candidate to represent you, if you're
against software patents.

>  Of 
> course, this is by no means a as much fun as a conspiracy theory...

Since you yourself don't seem to be too acquainted with the internal
working of European legislation I suggest you keep your voice a little
more down, OK? ;-) 

regards,
Tobias W.