[Nottingham] Patents considered harmful?

[Martin Garton]

On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Robert Davies wrote:

> Any chance of you putting something together that's digestible?  The proposal 
> details are not exactly light reading.

I know. I have only read bits and pieces so far, but I intend to try and
digest it a bit more in the next few days if I can find the mental energy.

> I got same straight away, their position appeared the most favourable to
> Open Source, Free software and (IMO) the commercial software development
> industry.

>From Nick Clegg also?  Maybe we should have a quick show of hands to see
which of our MEPs have been contacted much about this already, and
concentrate on educating those who might not have had the issue brought to
their attention yet.

> So how do we take on what the directive's proponents are saying and
> dismantle the statements they make?  What are the weaknesses?

It seems to me that there aren't many weaknesses in what they are saying,
because what they are saying is not very closely related to the truth of
the directive.  My feeling is that we need to be demonstrating why the
directive is problematic by picking example cases (eg, ones that have
happened in the US) and testing them against the directive.  I suspect
this will be hard work though.

Incidentally, so far I have been arguing along the "software patents are
bad for small business, and help big business to lock out smaller
competition" line, in effect against software patents altogether. I am
starting to wonder about limiting the argument to free software and the
damage that will be done to it by software patents, because that seems
easier to convince people of.

The only remaining thing then is so hope that they see free software as
something worth saving and judging by some things that many MEPs have
already fallen for, it won't be easy. As an example from swpat.ffii.org
MEPs were sent a "Joint Statement of the Industry" about ways of
"protecting opensource software" which included the requirements that:

1. whenever an interface is patented, interoperable software may not be
published or used without a license

How exactly is that going to be "protecting opensource software"?

Answer: It's not, and those who wrote it are either deeply uninformed or 
highly decieptful.

This is what we are up against.

Regards,
Martin.

PS. I keep using the term "we" in these patent related emails. I am
refering to opponents of software patents, not neccesarily linux users or
any other group.