05.06.09

Gemini version available ♊︎

Red Hat States Its Case Against Software Patents

Posted in Europe, GNU/Linux, Law, Microsoft, Patents, Red Hat at 6:08 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

“The European Patent Office is an executive organisation, it deals especially with patent applicants, as such, its view of the world may be biased. As an executive organisation, its interpretative powers are very limited. The European Patent Convention excludes computer programs, it is outside the EPO’s power to change this.”

Ante Wessels

MS and GE (Microsoft and General Electric) have jointly filed their case in favour of software patents in Europe (de facto banning of Free software) and FFII has made their mockery available as HTML, but what we also have is the submission from Red Hat, which only Glyn Moody appears to have analysed. As he put it:

My reasoning was that this was an extremely technical consideration of the issue of software patents, and that the people pondering the matter would not be interested in vague philosophical waffle about why software patents were a bad thing. They would be looking for keenly-argued, legalistic comments of the kind I was manifestly unable to provide.

Instead, I thought it better to leave this one to those better able to obtain some heavy legal advice on what should be written, and how.

Steve Stites, a regular at LinuxToday, writes:

I think that a more appropriate title for the article would be “Red Hat speaks for us all on software patents”.

Thank you, Red Hat.

Red Hat presents the Open Source argument against software patents very well. I would also like to see a commercial software company such as Microsoft present the commercial argument against software patents. Software patents are less than a zero sum game among the commercial software companies. They create a net drag on the commercial software industry. Microsoft has the largest loses of any company in the software patent wars and they are the logical commercial candidate to lobby for the abolition of software patents.

Despite some uncertainty, Red Hat makes it clear that it is against software patents. So now is the right time for Red Hat to stop filing for some. Hypocrisy is not a good advocacy tool.

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Reddit
  • email

Decor ᶃ Gemini Space

Below is a Web proxy. We recommend getting a Gemini client/browser.

Black/white/grey bullet button This post is also available in Gemini over at this address (requires a Gemini client/browser to open).

Decor ✐ Cross-references

Black/white/grey bullet button Pages that cross-reference this one, if any exist, are listed below or will be listed below over time.

Decor ▢ Respond and Discuss

Black/white/grey bullet button If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

9 Comments

  1. Dale B. Halling said,

    May 7, 2009 at 1:00 pm

    Gravatar

    The arguments against software patents have a fundamental flaw. As any electrical engineer knows, solutions to problems implemented in software can also be realized in hardware, i.e., electronic circuits. The main reason for choosing a software solution is the ease in implementing changes, the main reason for choosing a hardware solution is speed of processing. Therefore, a time critical solution is more likely to be implemented in hardware. While a solution that requires the ability to add features easily will be implemented in software. As a result, to be intellectually consistent those people against software patents also have to be against patents for electronic circuits.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Explain this to kids with a compiler in a classroom.

    There is only scarcity when you introduce something physical. As even Microsoft agrees, there needs to be a device.

    Dale B. Halling Reply:

    A computer is a physical item, the software runs on a computer. Therefore a computer running software is a physical tangible item – it consumes energy gives off heat. It’s processing power and memory are limited and therefore scarce.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Therefore a computer running…

    Correct. Unlike software. I am not talking about storage devices that hold program code.

  2. saulgoode said,

    May 7, 2009 at 3:16 pm

    Gravatar

    Should a computer simulation/model of a patented machine be considered to infringe on that patent?

    Should your answer be “yes”, you are saying that software makes or uses the invention’s technology. This would permit software to be patentable, but then it should be required “real world” prior art be taken into account when granting software patents — a software implementation of a real world machine or process would not be distinct with regard to patents from that machine or process.

    Should your answer be “no”, you are effectively saying that software should not be patentable. Even if a patent were granted on a software “invention”, a program which “simulates” that software technology should not be infringing. If a software model of a machine isn’t infringing then why should a software model of a software model be infringing?

    Dale B. Halling Reply:

    Should a computer simulation/model of a patented machine be considered to infringe on that patent?

    It depends on the what the invention is. For instance, a computer simulation of a part for an airplane would not likely infringe the claims of a patent on the part for an airplane. A computer simulation of spreadsheet, would almost certainly infringe the claims of a patent for a spreadsheet. You have to understand the role of the claims in a patent to answer you question.

    As to you second question, should it be required “real world” prior art be taken into account when granting software patents? Absolutely. This is true of all patents and “real world” prior art is considered in all areas of technology. The one problem with software is that the patent office discouraged patents on software for several decades. As a result, there internal database of knowledge about patents is not as rich as in other areas of technology. The solution however is not to ban patents on software, but to encourage patents on software.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Going by this logic, we might as well just acquire monopolies on the use of particular words from the English dictionary too, such as the word “Android”, which Google et al are now sued for (almost $100,000,000 in claims).

    More monopolies are more fences, they are not innovation enablers.

    Lawyers like to repeat the opposite claim until it becomes inherently true in the minds of gullible people. They don’t like scope. More patents are more revenue (to lawyers). The same goes for the EPO, which is now ‘patenting’ pigs (so to speak) and supersedes/circumvents the judgment of an impartial entity like the parliament.

    This indoctrination is what such lobbying events are for.

  3. saulgoode said,

    May 7, 2009 at 6:05 pm

    Gravatar

    A computer simulation of spreadsheet, would almost certainly infringe the claims of a patent for a spreadsheet.

    But if real world prior art is admitted, surely spreadsheets would have been precedented by human computers such as those employed by Gaspard de Prony over two centuries ago.

    The one problem with software is that the patent office discouraged patents on software for several decades. As a result, there internal database of knowledge about patents is not as rich as in other areas of technology. The solution however is not to ban patents on software, but to encourage patents on software.

    The problem isn’t the patent office’s lack of knowledge about patents, it is their inability to recognize that “innovations” such as using lookup tables for video conversion are no different than the log and trig tables generated by de Prony’s human spreadsheets 200+ years ago. Doing something that has already been done does not become inventive just because it is done with a digital computer.

    And for what it’s worth, there is no precedent in U.S. case law that would suggest a computer simulation of a patented technology infringes on those patents. Therein lies the solution I would propose: formalize the adoption of a Fair Use for patents which would permit software modeling of patented technology — no exception to be made if the technology being modeled is itself software.

    Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    Two classes of patents have become notorious for this reason; the first is the “using a machine” patents, the second is the “over the Internet/network” patents.

DecorWhat Else is New


  1. Gemini Milestones and Growth (Almost 2,000 Known Gemini Servers Now, 39,000 Pages in Ours)

    The diaspora to Gemini Protocol or the transition to alternative 'webs' is underway; a linearly growing curve suggests that inertia/momentum is still there and we reap the benefits of early adoption of Gemini



  2. [Meme] Get Ready for Unified Patent Court (UPC) to be Taken to Court

    The Unified Patent Court (UPC) and Unitary Patent system that’s crafted to empower EPO thugs isn’t legal and isn’t constitutional either; even a thousand fake news 'articles' (deliberate misinformation or disinformation) cannot change the simple facts because CJEU isn’t “trial by media”



  3. The EPO Needs High-Calibre Examiners, Not Politicians Who Pretend to Understand Patents and Science

    Examiners are meant to obstruct fake patents or reject meritless patent applications; why is it that working conditions deteriorate for those who are intellectually equipped to do the job?



  4. Free Software is Greener

    Software Freedom is the only way to properly tackle environmental perils through reuse and recycling; the mainstream media never talks about it because it wants people to "consume" more and more products



  5. Links 25/1/2022: Git 2.35 and New openSUSE Hardware

    Links for the day



  6. IRC Proceedings: Monday, January 24, 2022

    IRC logs for Monday, January 24, 2022



  7. Links 25/1/2022: GPL Settlement With Patrick McHardy, Godot 4.0 Alpha 1, and DXVK 1.9.4 Released

    Links for the day



  8. Proprietary Software is Pollution

    "My daughter asked me about why are we throwing away some bits of technology," Dr. Andy Farnell says. "This is my attempt to put into words for "ordinary" people what I tried to explain to a 6 year old."



  9. Microsoft GitHub Exposé — Part XV — Cover-Up and Defamation

    Defamation of one’s victims might be another offence to add to the long list of offences committed by Microsoft’s Chief Architect of GitHub Copilot, Balabhadra (Alex) Graveley; attempting to discredit the police report is a new low and can get Mr. Graveley even deeper in trouble (Microsoft protecting him only makes matters worse)



  10. [Meme] Alexander Ramsay and Team UPC Inciting Politicians to Break the Law and Violate Constitutions, Based on Misinformation, Fake News, and Deliberate Lies Wrapped up as 'Studies'

    The EPO‘s law-breaking leadership (Benoît Battistelli, António Campinos and their corrupt cronies), helped by liars who don't enjoy diplomatic immunity, are cooperating to undermine courts across the EU, in effect replacing them with EPO puppets who are patent maximalists (Europe’s equivalents of James Rodney Gilstrap and Alan D Albright, a Donald Trump appointee, in the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas, respectively)



  11. Has the Administrative Council Belatedly Realised What Its Job in the European Patent Organisation Really Is?

    The "Mafia" which took over the EPO (the EPO's own workers call it "Mafia") isn't getting its way with a proposal, so it's preventing the states from even voting on it!



  12. [Meme] Team UPC is Celebrating a Pyrrhic Victory

    Pyrrhic victory best describes what's happening at the moment (it’s a lobbying tactic, faking/staging things to help false prophecies be fulfilled, based on hopes and wishes alone), for faking something without bothering to explain the legal basis is going to lead to further escalations and complaints (already impending)



  13. Links 24/1/2022: Scribus 1.5.8 and LXLE Reviewed

    Links for the day



  14. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, January 23, 2022

    IRC logs for Sunday, January 23, 2022



  15. [Meme] Team UPC Congratulating Itself

    The barrage of fake news and misinformation about the UPC deliberately leaves out all the obvious and very important facts; even the EPO‘s António Campinos and Breton (Benoît Battistelli‘s buddy) participated in the lying



  16. Links 24/1/2022: pgBadger 11.7 Released, Catch-up With Patents

    Links for the day



  17. The Demonisation and Stereotyping of Coders Not Working for Big Corporations (or 'The System')

    The war on encrypted communication (or secure communications) carries on despite a lack of evidence that encryption stands in the way of crime investigations (most criminals use none of it)



  18. On the 'Peak Hacker' Series

    Hacker culture, unlike Ludditism, is ultimately a movement for justice, for equality, and for human rights through personal and collective emancipation; Dr. Farnell has done a good job explaining where we stand and his splendid series has come to a close



  19. Links 23/1/2022: First RC of Linux 5.17 and Sway 1.7 Released

    Links for the day



  20. Peak Code — Part III: After Code

    "Surveillance perimeters, smart TVs (Telescreens built to Orwell's original blueprint) watched over our living rooms. Mandatory smart everything kept us 'trustless'. Safe search, safe thoughts. We withdrew. Inside, we went quietly mad."



  21. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, January 22, 2022

    IRC logs for Saturday, January 22, 2022



  22. Links 23/1/2022: MongoDB 5.2, BuddyPress 10.0.0, and GNU Parallel 20220122

    Links for the day



  23. A Parade of Fake News About the UPC Does Not Change the General Consensus or the Simple Facts

    European Patents (EPs) from the EPO are granted in violation of the EPC; Courts are now targeted by António Campinos and the minions he associates with (mostly parasitic litigation firms and monopolists), for they want puppets for “judges” and for invalid patents to be magically rendered “valid” and “enforceable”



  24. Welcome to 2022: Intentional Lies Are 'Benefits' and 'Alternative Facts'

    A crooks-run EPO, together with the patent litigation cabal that we’ve dubbed ‘Team UPC’ (it has nothing to do with science or with innovation), is spreading tons of misinformation; the lies are designed to make the law-breaking seem OK, knowing that Benoît Battistelli and António Campinos are practically above the law, so perjury as well as gross violations of the EPC and constitutions won’t scare them (prosecution as deterrence just isn’t there, which is another inherent problem with the UPC)



  25. From Software Eating the World to the Pentagon Eating All the Software

    “Software is eating the world,” according to Marc Andreessen (co-founder of Netscape), but the Empire Strikes Back (not the movie, the actual empire) by hijacking all code by proxy, via Microsoft, just as it grabbed a lot of the world’s communications via Skype, bypassing the world's many national telecoms; coders need to fight back rather than participate in racist (imperial) shams such as GitHub



  26. Links 22/1/2022: Skrooge 2.27.0 and Ray-Tracing Stuff

    Links for the day



  27. IRC Proceedings: Friday, January 21, 2022

    IRC logs for Friday, January 21, 2022



  28. Peak Code — Part II: Lost Source

    "Debian and Mozilla played along. They were made “Yeoman Freeholders” in return for rewriting their charters to “work closely with the new Ministry in the interests of all stakeholders” – or some-such vacuous spout… because no one remembers… after that it started."



  29. Links 22/1/2022: Ubuntu MATE 21.10 for GPD Pocket 3, MINISFORUM Preloads GNU/Linux

    Links for the day



  30. Computer Users Should be Operators, But Instead They're Being Operated by Vendors and Governments

    Computers have been turned into hostile black boxes (unlike Blackbox) that distrust the person who purchased them; moreover, from a legislative point of view, encryption (i.e. computer security) is perceived and treated by governments like a threat instead of something imperative — a necessity for society’s empowerment (privacy is about control and people in positions of unjust power want total and complete control)


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

Recent Posts