EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS


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
  • Slashdot

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one


  1. Dale B. Halling said,

    May 7, 2009 at 1:00 pm


    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


    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


    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.

What Else is New

  1. Our 14th Birthday is Coming

    We're turning 14 shortly and we need ideas from readers (things that can be done to mark the event and celebrate 'on-line')

  2. In Spite of IBM's Difficult Past and Particularly Dark History, Under Arvind Krishna’s Leadership It Has Only Shown Signs of Improving

    This winter, 6 months after Arvind Krishna’s tenure as CEO began, we can generally say that things seem to have improved and we look forward to further improvements

  3. Links 25/10/2020: GNU Taler's IETF Milestone, RISC OS 5.28 and New Ubuntu Community Council

    Links for the day

  4. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, October 24, 2020

    IRC logs for Saturday, October 24, 2020

  5. Links 24/10/2020: GDB 10.1, Kodachi 7.4, Wine 5.20

    Links for the day

  6. Celebrating Code of Conduct Violations

    Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock

  7. The Militarised Elephant in the Room Still Commands a Lot of Free Software Development

    We take a difficult (albeit in-depth and perfectly factual) look at IBM's past and present; considering this is the company that controls Red Hat (which in turn controls many key projects in GNU/Linux) we need a better understanding of the real context, not PR fluff and marketing

  8. Juve Patent's Love of Patent Trolls and Their Misinformation

    The press 'gutter' known as Juve (basically propaganda disguised as 'news' since years ago) has gotten to the point where the publisher is just an extension of lawyers and liars

  9. IRC Proceedings: Friday, October 23, 2020

    IRC logs for Friday, October 23, 2020

  10. Look How Many Tux I Give!

    "Long live rms, long live (Hyperbola) GNU/BSD, and happy hacking."

  11. Embrace, Extend, and Extensions: Two New Reasons to Delete GitHub, Which Microsoft Ruined for Everyone (Except the Copyright Cartel and Other Censors)

    GitHub is being turned into a garbage dump with malicious masters (or monsters, or mobsters); many people are denied access for using the 'wrong' browser and developers/projects are being censored (not for doing anything wrong or illegal, either)

  12. [Meme] When EPO Staff Claims to be 'Ill' or 'Sick'... During a Pandemic's European Peak

    Gotta check and verify that those 'lazy' EPO examiners aren't just faking being ill (in order to not meet "production" targets)

  13. The EPO Has Relegated or Lowered Itself to Extremely Poor Standards

    Today's EPO continues to reaffirm the image of global weakness; having failed to improve the working conditions and quality of the work (its actions did the exact opposite), it's nowadays begging China to send over lots of workload irrespective of quality or merit and it is outsourcing the functions of the Office to the United States

  14. Links 23/10/2020: Turing Pi 2, GNU Parallel 20201022

    Links for the day

  15. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, October 22, 2020

    IRC logs for Thursday, October 22, 2020

  16. Links 23/10/2020: 'Groovy Gorilla' Everywhere in the News

    Links for the day

  17. For Better 'Tech Rights' in the United States (and the World at Large) the 'Orange Man' Needs to Go

    With less than a fortnight before election day we explain our stance from a purely tech-related rationale

  18. [Meme] Microsoft Never 'Brought' Skype to GNU/Linux (It Just Bought Skype) and It Never 'Brought' Edge to GNU/Linux Either (Google Did)

    Foolish media or gullible 'journalists' are giving Microsoft credit for other people's work; this isn't the first time either, but it helps perpetuate lies such as "Microsoft loves Linux" (so who cares about facts anyway?)

  19. It's Going to be a Long, Long Winter

    Today we revert back to lock-down mode; we're reflecting and pondering what comes next

  20. TechRadar is an Irresponsible Clickbait and Misinformation Site Disguised as 'News'

    TechRadar is no tech and no radar, either. It's just an opportunistic click-harvesting machine, disguised as a source of "news"; today we deal with the latest example (among many).

  21. Links 22/10/2020: LibreOffice 6.4.7, Septor 2020.5, Ubuntu 20.10 Released, FreeBSD Quarterly Status Report

    Links for the day

  22. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, October 21, 2020

    IRC logs for Wednesday, October 21, 2020

  23. Living Humbly (With Older Technology or None) is More Compatible With Privacy- and Freedom-Respecting Technological Lifestyle

    Simplicity sometimes trumps so-called 'novelty', especially when it comes to human rights and users' freedom

  24. Reasons Why You (and Everybody Else) Should Join the Fight for Software Freedom

    Society is being closely watched and controlled (more so during/after the latest pandemic) and people must carefully consider the true importance of resisting proprietary technology (controlled remotely by state actors)

  25. Ways and Means to Reduce One's Dependency on Google's Various Monopolies and Near-Monopolies

    Getting rid of Google means a lot more than embracing DumbDumbGo (DDG) or some other sites that spy just like Google; we're taking stock of some options

  26. The European Commission is Still M.I.A. Regarding EPO Corruption (and the EPO's Management Plays Dirty, as Always)

    There's no change in the EU; the EUIPO and EPO enjoy complete and total immunity/impunity, with the Commission being manned by those who are deeply complicit

  27. 10 Reasons Why All This 'Edge for Linux' Coverage is a Total Farce

    The fake hype surrounding "Edge" is an inauthentic hype/buzz campaign made to coincide with anti-Google sentiments spread by Microsoft front/pressure groups

  28. Microsoft's IIS Has Collapsed Again This Past Month (and IIS Will Not and Cannot Survive This Way)

    Netcraft shows that Microsoft's decline further accelerates in the Web servers space; IIS is becoming financially unviable

  29. Links 21/10/2020: Alpine 3.12.1, Tor Browser 10.0.2

    Links for the day

  30. [Meme] US Department of Justice Should Have Taken on Microsoft Again, Not Google

    When lobbying, connections and political sway determine the actions of the American government it's hardly surprising that Bill Gates gets the Trump administration to fight for him (to make him even richer)

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