From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,52a0bacbcdd2da17 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-08-18 00:21:26 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!skynet.be!skynet.be!louie!tlk!not-for-mail Sender: lbrenta@lbrenta Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Software Patent Concerns => New Black Markets? References: From: Ludovic Brenta Date: 18 Aug 2003 09:20:46 +0200 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: -= Belgacom Usenet Service =- NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.201.173.228 X-Trace: 1061191254 reader1.news.skynet.be 287 80.201.173.228:42010 X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@skynet.be Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:41673 Date: 2003-08-18T09:20:46+02:00 List-Id: The Free Software Foundation is campaigning against software patents. The arguments are well known by now. First, software consists of algorithms, and algorithms are a special form of mathematical proof. Can you patent a mathematical proof? For example, can you patent to algorithm to compute the value of e using the series: e = 1 + sum of (1/n!) ? The answer, historically, has been a resounding NO. Mathematical proofs are published under copyright law, not patent law. Software may also be construed as a kind of musical partition, which is "played" by the computer. And music is not patentable. What is patentable is the computer itself, i.e. the hardware, and the process to manufacture it. Second, the patent system was designed to promote the advancement of technology. By contrast, software patents tend to hinder such advancement, as Warren pointed out. Third, the patent system was created in the interest of the general public. Instead, software patents are being used in the interest of a few mega-corporations. They mainly use their portfolios of patents in two ways. One way (a) is to block smaller competitors from entering a market; this includes SMEs, and hobbyist programmers who work for free and cannot afford a lawsuit, _even if they win the lawsuit in the end_. The other way (b) is to enter into "cross-licensing agreements" with their bigger competitors [2]. The only beneficiaries of these "cross-license agreements" are the mega-corporations involved, _not_ their customers, certainly not their competitors, and certainly not the general public. These three reasons alone explain why there is a petition online [1] where all US voters are invited to lobby against software patents. Fourth, there is a geostrategic twist to this. Europe does not have software patents, but the US and Japan do. American mega-corporations are lobbying the European Parliament to pass a law that permits software patents [3]. The European software industry is much smaller than that in the US, and consists mainly of SMEs. If the EP adopts software patents, then these SMEs will become easy targets for the US mega-corporations, as per (a). More importantly, it may well be possible for European governments, armies, and utilities to get sued over use of patented cryptographic or other algorithms. I dare not go further into this reasoning, as the consequences could be catastrophic. [1] http://www.petitiononline.com/pasp01/petition.html [2] http://www.zdnet.com.au/newstech/enterprise/story/0,2000048640,20272597,00.htm [3] http://swpat.ffii.org/events/2003/europarl/07/ -- Ludovic Brenta.