| fernand0 | his is the fourth |
|---|
| fernand0 | time we celebrate this conference and we are grateful to all of you: |
|---|
| fernand0 | speakers, people who helped with organization and all the people coming |
|---|
| fernand0 | here to meet here. |
|---|
| fernand0 | As usual, the talk will be here, at this channel and we have prepared |
|---|
| fernand0 | the channel #redes where a set of volunteers will translate from English |
|---|
| fernand0 | to Spanish. |
|---|
| fernand0 | There is also Dutch translation in #taee. |
|---|
| fernand0 | We will not moderate this channel in order to facilitate discussion. If |
|---|
| fernand0 | it becomes too noisy, we will have to moderate it. |
|---|
| fernand0 | Our first talk will be Round table about "Software Patents in Europe". |
|---|
| fernand0 | The organizer of this round table is Guy Brand (bug). He is an IT |
|---|
| fernand0 | manager of a research institute in France Open Source Software Advocate |
|---|
| fernand0 | and User, and also, a good friend of UniNET and also one of the |
|---|
| fernand0 | volunteers that keep this up and running. |
|---|
| fernand0 | For more information about the ideas that will be discused here, visit |
|---|
| fernand0 | http://www.ffii.org/, which is a foundation fighting to keep |
|---|
| fernand0 | information free on Internet. Some of the fellow people working there is |
|---|
| fernand0 | here with us, today. |
|---|
| fernand0 | Thank you to all for comming. |
|---|
| fernand0 | Holger will start this presentation. |
|---|
| fernand0 | Holger .... |
|---|
| holger_bl | Hello everyone, |
|---|
| holger_bl | welcome to the talk |
|---|
| holger_bl | first a little background |
|---|
| holger_bl | the vote of the 1st reading in europarl was 24 sept |
|---|
| holger_bl | of this year |
|---|
| holger_bl | this was after a demonstration in brussels |
|---|
| holger_bl | and a lot of communication with meps |
|---|
| holger_bl | (that got 100s of emails and more personal communication) |
|---|
| holger_bl | the person who is in charge of the directive |
|---|
| holger_bl | arlene mccarthy thinks this had been the most intense lobbying |
|---|
| holger_bl | for any software project law... |
|---|
| holger_bl | (see arlene mccarthy on ffii.org) for more detail |
|---|
| holger_bl | as you can see on http://swpat.ffii.org/news/03/plen0924/index.en.html |
|---|
| holger_bl | the directive as it now stands is not too bad |
|---|
| holger_bl | but *note* this is after the first reading. |
|---|
| holger_bl | as in normal procedure, the directive now has to pass thru the council of ministers |
|---|
| holger_bl | and here some opposition is mounting, eg from telcos, see |
|---|
| holger_bl | http://swpat.ffii.org/news/03/telcos1107/index.en.html |
|---|
| holger_bl | at this conference |
|---|
| holger_bl | the target is to prepare a conference in april 2004 |
|---|
| holger_bl | 28/29 april 2004 in brussels http://swpat.ffii.org/events/2004/test04/index.en.html |
|---|
| holger_bl | where we can put additional material on the table to fight software patents (this is still needed) |
|---|
| holger_bl | at this conference i see many persons from spain |
|---|
| holger_bl | there is also the need to support local infrastructure (eg working on local ministers etc) |
|---|
| holger_bl | you can do this by subscribing proinnova AT listas.hispalinux.es eg |
|---|
| holger_bl | for other lists, see lists.ffii.org |
|---|
| holger_bl | . |
|---|
| bug | holger_bl: maybe we could illustrate the danger with the last example of today |
|---|
| holger_bl | ok ,l that was my part, may i hand of to j_heald ? |
|---|
| bug | Microsoft has been awarded a patent by the United States Patent and |
|---|
| bug | Trademark Office (USPTO) on writing Windows applications in HTML. |
|---|
| j_heald | this is on top of recent MS patents on the FAT file format |
|---|
| j_heald | and MS patents on XML formats |
|---|
| j_heald | -- we're expecting MS to become a lot more assertive in trying to enforce its patents |
|---|
| j_heald | we've also heard that they are trying to ecourage other companies |
|---|
| j_heald | to let MS pay for them to assert patents against Free Software |
|---|
| j_heald | so things are likely to become a lot hotter |
|---|
| j_heald | the kind of battle we're seeing with SCO is just the start |
|---|
| j_heald | but of course it's about much more than MS |
|---|
| j_heald | something like 30,000 software patents already filed |
|---|
| j_heald | that is very hard for any software company - even the biggest to keep track of |
|---|
| j_heald | eg: even the USPTO awarded the LZW algorithm a patent to 2 different cos. |
|---|
| bug | -> questions to #qc please |
|---|
| j_heald | IBM as well as Unisys (the GIF patent) |
|---|
| j_heald | So it's maybe worth talking about how the legislative timetable works |
|---|
| j_heald | As Holger said, the EU Parliament gave its version of the directive in September |
|---|
| j_heald | that's it's 1st reading in Parliament |
|---|
| holger_bl | there are usually two readings |
|---|
| j_heald | what happens now is that the member states of the EU propose a counter-text |
|---|
| j_heald | which is worked out between them in a secret committee |
|---|
| j_heald | made up of a representative from each country |
|---|
| j_heald | -- usually somebody from the patent office |
|---|
| j_heald | sometimes somebody from the Economics ministry |
|---|
| j_heald | So at the moment we need to try to influence this new text |
|---|
| j_heald | But it's difficult, because they are very secretive |
|---|
| j_heald | and also the patent offices *like* patents |
|---|
| j_heald | -- they don't see why there is a problem |
|---|
| j_heald | BUT: there is some good news |
|---|
| j_heald | At first we were afraid that this Council wroking group (as it's known) |
|---|
| j_heald | might ignore the results of the democratic parliament altogether |
|---|
| j_heald | & vote straight away for a draft text they had already made in November 2002 |
|---|
| j_heald | which was very bad |
|---|
| j_heald | it was as bad as any other text we have seen, |
|---|
| j_heald | and captured all the worst features of each |
|---|
| j_heald | But that didn't happen |
|---|
| j_heald | We believe that the French are taking the lead |
|---|
| j_heald | and calling for a full examination of the issue |
|---|
| j_heald | (although it is very difficult to get any solid info about what is going on) |
|---|
| j_heald | So |
|---|
| j_heald | we know that they missed the chance to get the ministers to approve a text |
|---|
| j_heald | both on Novembe 10 and November 27 |
|---|
| j_heald | because they could not yet agree it |
|---|
| j_heald | The next dates that the ministers will meet |
|---|
| bug | democratic discussions have been delayed until the new parliament is ready right ? |
|---|
| j_heald | are 11 March 2004 |
|---|
| j_heald | and the<j_heald> both on Novembe 10 and November 27 |
|---|
| j_heald | because they could not yet agree it |
|---|
| j_heald | The next dates that the ministers will meet |
|---|
| bug | democratic discussions have been delayed until the new parliament is ready right ? |
|---|
| j_heald | are 11 March 2004 |
|---|
| j_heald | and then 17 May 2004 |
|---|
| j_heald | and then 17 May 2004 |
|---|
| bug | we have a few questions waiting |
|---|
| xdrudis | yes, democratic discussions in Parliament won't start until the Council gives its common position, but that'll be after the elections in practice |
|---|
| bug | < amd> how long do the software patents last? |
|---|
| xdrudis | but diplomatic discussions in Council are going on as j_heald explains |
|---|
| xdrudis | all patents last 20 years in all states adhered to the TRIPs treaty |
|---|
| xdrudis | I mean <=20 yearas, of course, unless the patent owner loses interest |
|---|
| bug | does this make sense in software field ? |
|---|
| jonas | 20 years is of course an eternity in the software development field |
|---|
| jonas | But just shortening the time is not what we are after. |
|---|
| holger_bl | (it is also not possible because TRIPS says: patent = 20 yrs) |
|---|
| jonas | First of all, it would be forbidden to make an exception for software patents due to the TRIPS treaty (some international trade treaty) |
|---|
| bug | < slef> Isn't the "Open Source" movement about copyright only? |
|---|
| phm | Indeed we probably need to change the name of the channel |
|---|
| phm | The topic is quite unrelated to "open source" |
|---|
| xdrudis | software patents are against copyright, so anybody that has some interest in software copyright has some interest in swpats. But yes, it's not only about "open source" in any way. The channel name is not the best. |
|---|
| jonas | Secondly, the problem with software patents lies much more deeply: they're saying you can patent mathematics or algorithms, unless you state they are implemented in a computer program. This shows they know it is wrong to allow such patents (more bad effects than good), but that they nevertheless cave in to pressure from the US and some large companies. |
|---|
| jonas | In software development, copyright is on the actual code you write (the source code of your program) |
|---|
| holger_bl | The difference is: you only can knowingly infringe copyright, but you also can innocently infringe patents. |
|---|
| jonas | Software patents however, are not patents on computer programs, but on algorithms, business methods and mathematical methods. The reason they are called software patents, is that the those patents are only valid if you implement those things in software. |
|---|
| holger_bl | jonas: how about "computer-implemented inventions?" |
|---|
| phm | I'd say they are called software patents because the claim describes software, i.e. a general purpose computing equipment used according to some rule. |
|---|
| jonas | So it's a bit silly: you can't get a patent on a method where you use a client card with a bar code, so you can scan it every time the customer comes to your shop (so that he doesn't have to give his information every time). However, you can get a software patent (at least in the US) on a client card implemented in a computer program: the Amazon 1-click patent. |
|---|
| bug | < slef> UK Patent Office likes patents because it has to generate revenue to cover its costs. I hear this is a problem in New Mexico and some other US states. What is the situation in other places? |
|---|
| jonas | The European Patent Office is in exactly the same situation. |
|---|
| xdrudis | at least the EPO is also self financed from patents |
|---|
| phm | The German PTO is not self-financed, but their interest is not much different |
|---|
| phm | If the number of patents drops seriously, the office is in trouble anyway. |
|---|
| phm | Patent offices probably don't really want the scandal patents |
|---|
| phm | But they also want no regulation that could put a clear limit on patentability. |
|---|
| phm | So in case of doubt they prefer to put up with the scandal patents. |
|---|
| bug | isn't also EU trying to get control over EPO ? |
|---|
| xdrudis | Note that even if a patent office is not financed from patents, it is still less work to grant a patent than to reject it. And no criteria is easier to apply than any criteria. On the other hand, when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail, so patent experts think patents are great for everything. There's also a kind of guild feeling (is "guild" right English for "gremio"?) |
|---|
| phm | EU is trying to become a patent office itself. |
|---|
| holger_bl | eg in germany patent lawyers have interned at the patent office |
|---|
| holger_bl | some patent experts at the ministries being former patent lawyers etc |
|---|
| phm | The EU patent department (industrial property unit) is part of the same world |
|---|
| phm | of institutions. |
|---|
| j_heald | in the UK too, you often start for a few years at the patent office, then join a private patent law company |
|---|
| j_heald | it's a very close, small world |
|---|
| bug | < Mondongo> so, basically, it's a cabal between the guild of patents and the great software lords with tons of money? how can we oppose that? |
|---|
| j_heald | yes we can |
|---|
| j_heald | because ultimately the civil servants answer to the politicians |
|---|
| jonas | We can oppose this the way we have done it until now: by spreading clear information. |
|---|
| j_heald | & the politicians answer to the media etc |
|---|
| jonas | and to us :) |
|---|
| holger_bl | petition.eurolinux.org has a quarter million signatures. |
|---|
| j_heald | & to public knowledge, public opinion |
|---|
| holger_bl | petition.eurolinux.org has a quarter million signatures. |
|---|
| j_heald | & to public knowledge, public opinion |
|---|
| j_heald | 1/4 million signatures is good |
|---|
| j_heald | but often a single personal contact can be even better |
|---|
| jonas | The patent 'cabal' as you put it, needs this directive in order to make sure that software patents become enforceable in Europe. They can't get it without the conscent of the European Parliament and the Council. |
|---|
| j_heald | politicians just don't understand (yet) |
|---|
| jonas | There certainly are politicians that already understand, or at least want to understand. |
|---|
| trulux | yes , politicians and law related organizations |
|---|
| trulux | just look at the Eolas problem that will cause lot of damage against the www |
|---|
| bug | <dElEtE> Isn't the EOLAS case showing to the people the stupid part of patents? |
|---|
| jonas | The arguments that generally work best, are those based on economy: 75% of the already granted European software patents are owned by foreign companies. Making those enforceable, would not be good for European companies. |
|---|
| phm | Politicians don't necessarily see a problem here. |
|---|
| phm | E.g. Wuermeling MEP advertised Eolas as a success story. |
|---|
| j_heald | the MEPs finally did understand (many of them) |
|---|
| j_heald | particulalry the danger to small businesses |
|---|
| j_heald | but now we have to convince national politicians |
|---|
| phm | Which is why currently *we* need the directive in the EP version |
|---|
| trulux | The problem of Eolas is that Microsoft used the embbeded technology of activex components , Macromedia Flash , etc and that thi |
|---|
| j_heald | & the important national organisations the pols listen to |
|---|
| jonas | Also, one example of misuse cannot be used as proof that the whole concept is flawed. You have to dig deeper than just a few scandalous examples. |
|---|
| trulux | and Eolas had patented "the possibility of including any type of multimedia/embedded object into an accessible page like a website" |
|---|
| jonas | That's why for example the study of the Federal Trade Commission was very welcome (http://www.ffii.org.uk/ftc/ftc.html) |
|---|
| phm | And we are preparing a conference |
|---|
| trulux | who thinks that this helps the software engineering, open source or propietary , anyway , its completely bad , worst. Few lines of code or the idea like embeded objects can be patented and after used in legal fights |
|---|
| trulux | its my opinion , sorry it is not completely clear |
|---|
| phm | which also will dig deeper |
|---|
| phm | virtual meetings could perhaps be used for preparation and follow-up |
|---|
| jonas | It contains some very good arguments. For example, as rebuttal that software patents supposedly make sure that software innovations are publicised instead of kept secret: if it's a business method, it's public by its very nature. For other things, all the legalese in the patents often simply obfuscates the real information. As someone summarises it very nicely: "There's too much information and it is no longer meaningful." |
|---|
| phm | We now have a law proposal against software patents, and the other side is taking |
|---|
| phm | out examples of "good patents" which our law proposal makes invalid. |
|---|
| phm | So it is not enough for us to point to bad software patents like Eolas. |
|---|
| phm | The roles are inverted. |
|---|
| phm | right |
|---|
| holger_bl | Btw, it is here: http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/eubsa-swpat0202/plen0309/resu/index.en.html |
|---|
| phm | But any "compromise" with the Council can make it bad again. |
|---|
| holger_bl | eg throwing out 4.3a (forces of nature) or 6 (interoperability) |
|---|
| phm | The European Commission wants to throw out every single amendment that is any good. |
|---|
| bug | who says they are not good ? |
|---|
| phm | The Council will also go this way, unless they are put in the limelight. |
|---|
| trulux | Other examples of software patents abuse are , for example , patenting shared libraries or portions of code that are included in other projects without control, if that libaries become patented the developer must pay the royalties of the propietary enterprise or , worst , get ina legal fight. |
|---|
| jonas | The Commission. |
|---|
| phm | We have a law proposal that forbids software patents, not only |
|---|
| phm | "software patents abuse". So no more "abuse" examples needed. |
|---|
| trulux | Ok , excuse me. |
|---|
| jonas | The Commission itself is pressured by the US Patent Office, large multinationals (IBM, Nokia, Microsoft, Ericsson, ...) and "patent professionals", of course. |
|---|
| xdrudis | Btw, there is also some possibility that the EuroParl after the election chooses to ignore what the current EuroParl voted. My point is that what we got is somewhat good, maybe the best we can get, but it's not definitive |
|---|
| bug | phm: where is this law proposal ? |
|---|
| phm | http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309/ |
|---|
| phm | or the URL Holger pointed to. |
|---|
| phm | There's also a tabular listing on the euorparl website, see links section. |
|---|
| jonas | Maybe something interesting: I recently spoke to someone from the Commission, and he told me that it was basically irrelevant whether or not software patents are good for the European economy. The reason, according to him, is that the US wants them, since European companies currently have an advantage over their US competitors: |
|---|
| jonas | They can get software patents in the US and enforce them there, while US companies cannot do the same here. |
|---|
| jonas | He pointed to the recent trade frictions over the steel import tariffs as examples of how the US reacts to such situations. |
|---|
| holger_bl | the US gave in. |
|---|
| bug | jonas: of course, no patent inflation protects European SME/SMIs |
|---|
| trulux | The 1.6. Article 4a: Exclusions from patentability is self exlanatory . Here is a little quote : "inventions involving computer programs which implement business, mathematical or other methods and do not produce any technical effects beyond the normal physical interactions between a program and the computer, network or other programmable apparatus in which it is run shall not be patentable". |
|---|
| jonas | Nevertheless, it's very strange to hear something like that from the mouth of someone who is supposed to represent and defend the European Union. |
|---|
| tapani | But US companies can also compete in EU without fear of patents and EU companies cannot do that in USA! |
|---|
| phm | When everything else fails, the patent movement will call in brotherly help from |
|---|
| james_h | US patent law favours US inventors, so the EU could probably couterattack |
|---|
| phm | Washington. |
|---|
| xdrudis | trulux: I wonder what a "physical interactions between a program and the computer" is |
|---|
| phm | They are already doing that by spreading extreme interpretations of TRIPs. |
|---|
| phm | see http://swpat.ffii.org/analysis/trips/ |
|---|
| phm | "Physical interaction ..." is rather empty talk |
|---|
| phm | You were probably looking at one of the less good amendments. |
|---|
| jonas | OTOH, it was very nice to be able to actually talk to someone from the Commission. That's unfortunately something that happens way too little: talks between "our" side (FFII) and the "other" side (Commission, patent officials, ...). It's almost nothing but lobbying the middlemen (the members of the Parliament) and releasing one press release after another, accusing the other party of misrepresenting things. Let's hope our conference in April will amelio |
|---|
| jonas | Too much of the discussion is also about silly details, such as finding the imaginary difference between a "computer-implemented invention" and "pure software" (http://swpat.ffii.org/papiere/eubsa-swpat0202/kinv/index.en.html). |
|---|
| bug | right :-) |
|---|
| xdrudis | which is of course conenient for those wanting to avoid fundamental detail. |
|---|
| jonas | In fact, that person of the Commission I talked to, always said "software-implemented invention"... |
|---|
| xdrudis | detail => debate |
|---|
| phm | Maybe he had read our page? |
|---|
| bug | A few layers I have discussed with, all agree saying patents come from industrialisation and are useless or at least no longer adapted, and certainly not for pure intellectual creations such as software |
|---|
| bug | lawyers sorry |
|---|
| phm | Probably not patent lawyers. |
|---|
| xdrudis | patent lawyers ? |
|---|
| bug | no |
|---|
| bug | how could a patent lawyer be against a patent system which feeds him ? |
|---|
| phm | He could, if he lives on chemistry patents. |
|---|
| xdrudis | I also know some law professionals that ACK us |
|---|
| xdrudis | not patent lawyers |
|---|
| phm | Even those that ACK us will be politically passive. |
|---|
| phm | Only those that have an axe to grind will be active usually. |
|---|
| phm | Chemistry patent lawyers might ACK us but prefer to spend their time |
|---|
| phm | working for their customers. |
|---|
| xdrudis | Not all. But some can do little, or are just not terribly interested in either swpats or computers in general |
|---|
| xdrudis | err... I meant not all law professionals. Not "not all chemistry patent lawyers". |
|---|
| bug | or maybe we try to unmoderated again ? |
|---|
| phm | There are some questions which we might want to ask the public. |
|---|
| phm | I mean the audience. |
|---|
| bug | go |
|---|
| trulux | phm: let's ask |
|---|
| phm | Any experience with patents anyone? |
|---|
| phm | I mean suing or being sued, working around etc |
|---|
| philh | I don't understand: Should I ask questions here, or on #qc? |
|---|
| phm | not necessarily in software? |
|---|
| bug | philh: the channel is no longer moderated |
|---|
| bug | philh: you can ask here |
|---|
| phm | Any project made possible or impossible by patents? |
|---|
| philh | I'll ask here then. Is it more important for us to influence the Commission or the national governments (i.e. the Council)? |
|---|
| james_h | national governmnets |
|---|
| james_h | v. heard to influence the commission |
|---|
| james_h | easiest to influence the EU parliament |
|---|
| jonas | It is virtually impossible to influence the Commission directly. |
|---|
| philh | Regartding anything made impossible by patents, FFII has a list. Other than that another example was PGP, early versions of which had problems with the RSA patent. |
|---|
| james_h | ... but that won't discuss this again till end of next year |
|---|
| phm | We can of course influence the EP elections |
|---|
| phm | which are in June |
|---|
| phm | Nominations of candidates are in January |
|---|
| phm | We can try to make Swpat an election theme. |
|---|
| philh | Perhaps we should try to get commitments from all parties standing in the elections on the positions of swpat? |
|---|
| trulux | I remember the little problem with Qt libaries , now open under Qt P License , when qt was used in kde during the "propietary" age of qt |
|---|
| james_h | but the EP was already on our side: key challenge now is at the national level |
|---|
| xdrudis | IIRC qt trouble was copyright, not patents. |
|---|
| bug | philh: I think so, but many have already taken position |
|---|
| philh | at the very least, if we are asking candidates what they think of swpat, we'll be raising consciousness of the issue |
|---|
| phm | Also, MEPs can help in influencing national politics. |
|---|
| xdrudis | The EP is not so much on our side to neglect it. BEsides, those who are really on our side deserve recognition, I guess. |
|---|
| xdrudis | Anyway, raising issues in press, etc. influences everyone. |
|---|
| philh | xdrudis: you are right; we cannot assume the EP will automatically support us in future |
|---|
| phm | We need to document all this more and give people a kind of election guide. |
|---|
| phm | A guide to electing and influencing politicians next year. |
|---|
| BettoEcua | buenas tardes |
|---|
| phm | Be it MEPs or national governments. |
|---|
| philh | phm: a guide to influencing politicians is a very good idea |
|---|
| shadowtlx | Will it include all parties |
|---|
| phm | yes, of course |
|---|
| bug | it would be silly not to |
|---|
| phm | There is a start at http://swpat.ffii.org/players/ |
|---|
| phm | with wiki extensions on all pages. |
|---|
| jonas | Regarding the European elections in June: the page at <http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/eubsa-swpat0202/plen0309/vote/analysis.html> is very good to see which politicians voted according to our (FFII's) voting list and which didn't. Support the people that supported us, you can make a difference! |
|---|
| phm | We will also probably be sending someone to Brussels for the next year. |
|---|
| james_h | next question ? |
|---|
| phm | One person staying all the time, others coming for short stays. |
|---|
| phm | Both will be paid by FFII. |
|---|
| phm | So if anyone from Spain or elsewhere wants to work in Brussels for a week |
|---|
| phm | please contact us. |
|---|
| holger_bl | buero AT ffii.org ? |
|---|
| phm | Southern Europe was a good place in terms of voting, as you can see from the |
|---|
| phm | analysis.html page Jonas pointed to. |
|---|
| padrinosb | what do you think of the future of the software with copyletf ? |
|---|
| philh | It would be useful if the analysis.html page had a key |
|---|
| phm | Yes, or look at http://www.ffii.org/proj/ for more specific project information. |
|---|
| jonas | padrinosb : that it is completely independent of the software patents issue :) |
|---|
| james_h | padrinosb: it's getting bigger all the time, but it's creating enemies, and swpat may become one major way they will try to attack it. |
|---|
| phm | As FFII, we have to represent also SMEs who write proprietary software. |
|---|
| jonas | padrinosb : copyleft and copyright are orthogonal to software patents. Software patents are generally bad for all software developers not backed by a big company. This obviously includes a lot of open source and free software developers, but SME's face exactly the same problems. |
|---|
| phm | I think Linus said this nicely: "he who writes the code gets to determine the |
|---|
| phm | licences, and nobody else gets to complain." |
|---|
| padrinosb | I already join in the university in software development do you think when I graduate te developing will be 50% 50% 50% copyleft and 50% copyright ? |
|---|
| phm | Which is not to say that those backed by a big company actually gain from patents. |
|---|
| tapani | Even some big companies are beginning to have doubts, like Intel |
|---|
| james_h | padrinosb: one think we see is a lot of SMEs building commercial products on top of Free platforms |
|---|
| jonas | Indeed, it's mainly the juridical departments of those big companies that gain from patents (and who dictate this policy of defending software patents) |
|---|
| james_h | yes, apparently the engineers at Nokia and Ericsson don't like swpats at all |
|---|
| jonas | james_h : even if their entire source base is closed and they only ship windows binaries, it won't help them: they still infringe on IBM's patent on the progress bar. |
|---|
| phm | Our petition has >500 signatories from the 5 companies whose CEOs signed a letter |
|---|
| riel | interestingly even microsoft sells free software |
|---|
| phm | against the European Parliament's amendments http://swpat.ffii.org/news/03/telcos1107/ |
|---|
| riel | so the whole "you can't make money selling free software" slogan has lost most of its power ;) |
|---|
| bug | Nokia, Ericsson, Siemens or Alcate are not very representative of European SMEs, are they ? |
|---|
| holger_bl | ericsson open-sourced erlang a while ago to blur the picture more. |
|---|
| phm | Yes, but even in these companies there is a strong current of opinion against swpat. |
|---|
| holger_bl | how about telefonica ? |
|---|
| holger_bl | or vordafone ? |
|---|
| phm | Some telecom companies are our potential supporters. |
|---|
| bug | which typical european SME can afford 30,000 to 50,000 Euros for a communutary patent ? |
|---|
| phm | The community patent is in any case cheaper than current EPO patents |
|---|
| jonas | Everyone is our potential supporter, they just have to be convinced of the fact that we are on their side :) |
|---|
| tapani | Basically any telecom company just trying to get into the market should be our supporter |
|---|
| phm | I have spoken to some people from telecom companies, even IP departments, who |
|---|
| tapani | ... we just have to convince them that in the patent game they will always lose against the big ones |
|---|
| phm | supported our positions, |
|---|
| jonas | You not only have to pay for a patent however, you have to pay a lot more to enforce it (or to defend against an infringement lawsuit) |
|---|
| phm | because they don't want complementary markets to be monopolised. |
|---|
| james_h | question: is there strong pressure for sw patents in South America ? |
|---|
| james_h | eg from the USA ? |
|---|
| Mondongo | in south america there's not much talk about it ... |
|---|
| phm | Maybe some chances to get people to talk about the EP Amendments? |
|---|
| holger_bl | is software patentable there ? |
|---|
| Mondongo | holger_bl: I don't know. But here there's RAMPANT piracy ... |
|---|
| phm | AFAIK South America tends to follow European examples on this. |
|---|
| phm | Piracy is again orthogonal. |
|---|
| Mondongo | phm: No, we tend to be USA's puppets. |
|---|
| jonas | Mondongo : piracy is about copyright infringement. |
|---|
| james_h | was this the sort of issue discussed at the FTAA talks ? |
|---|
| phm | A country can have no industry at all but a patent office working unnoticed |
|---|
| phm | according to its patent beliefs. |
|---|
| phm | In Europe the South tended to be most pro-patent as long as the issue was |
|---|
| phm | low-profile, and most anti-swpat when it became politicised. |
|---|
| phm | South America will be our ally if they can politicise the issue, I'd assume. |
|---|
| holger_bl | reality check from sb actually from South America please ;-) |
|---|
| Mondongo | I *am* from south america! |
|---|
| Mondongo | from Argentina, actually |
|---|
| Mondongo | and the issues here are more related to hunger, corrupt politicians, unemployment ... I'd wager that software patents are very well behind it |
|---|
| Mondongo | politicians will follow the money. corruption here is HUGE. |
|---|
| phm | In Europe too the swpat issue was never highly visible. |
|---|
| phm | It was always far behind unemployment, public health etc. |
|---|
| Mondongo | phm: all right, maybe I was answering with a bit of a prejudice ;) |
|---|
| Mondongo | but politicians here in Argentina rarely listen to the "public" |
|---|
| phm | nor here |
|---|
| Mondongo | I've worked for the gov't and it's really a mafia, a mess of corruption |
|---|
| phm | not radically different here I'm afraid |
|---|
| phm | It took a long time for swpat to actually get some limited attention |
|---|
| Mondongo | phm: define "here" :) |
|---|
| jonas | Our demonstration in Brussels in August helped a lot to raise awareness among politicians, and opened several doors. |
|---|
| phm | And we were more successful in the south than in the north of Europe. |
|---|
| Mondongo | ok, then it's the same everywhere ;) I don't know about the state of software patents. leave an e-mail and I'll try to find out! |
|---|
| holger_bl | good ! blasum AT ffii.org |
|---|
| holger_bl | or buero AT ffii.org for redundancy ;-) |
|---|
| Mondongo | ok, noted! |
|---|
| phm | The word about the European Parliament's decision and the return of good |
|---|
| phm | traditional patent doctrines needs to be spread to S.A. |
|---|
| phm | Not many people there will be spreading it, and those here try to keep |
|---|
| phm | silent about it. |
|---|
| phm | Many interested people in S.A. will read law journals and get misinformation |
|---|
| phm | about what is happening here. |
|---|
| james_h | next question ? |
|---|
| bug | ok |
|---|
| salvo | can we win? |
|---|
| phm | We already won two major battles. |
|---|
| philh | salvo: I think we can |
|---|
| phm | The two major battles I'd say. |
|---|
| philh | but we haven't won the war... yet |
|---|
| Mondongo | update: checking with some friends, it seems that the GPL means squat for Argentine law |
|---|
| phm | But there are more battles coming up. |
|---|
| bug | I'd like to thank all our group of happy FFII activists :-) |
|---|
| jonas | Mondongo : GPL has nothing to do with software patents. |
|---|
| bug | They worked for you all, not only at the European Parliament. And they are still... |
|---|
| bug | Muchas gracias, merci beaucoup |
|---|
| Mondongo | jonas: oh, ok. A search on Clarin (the most read newspaper here) turns out several articles about the software patents in Europe. |
|---|
| bug | and thanks to the audience too |
|---|
| fernand00 | we'll publish the logs for this talk as soon as possible in our website |
|---|
| fernand00 | thank you to all |
|---|
