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

11.28.10

New Push for Software Patents in Europe (Innovation Union) While UK’s Tim Berners-Lee Opposes (F)RAND

Posted in Europe, Free/Libre Software, Patents at 12:10 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Tim Berners-Lee

Image from Wikimedia

Summary: The debate over patents in Europe is starting to heat up again, just shortly after the patent maximalists got defeated; Sir Tim Berners-Lee explains his opposition to (F)RAND, in addition to software patents

EUROPE is under constant threat from the software patents lobby and the hawks from the USPTO. They try to warp the EPO so as to better serve the clients in the United States, clearly at the expense of European ones (the multinationals can pretend to be European and American at the same time). The patent lobby has pushed for more or less the same goal all along, but occasionally the name of the process gets changed a little. The one advocated most recently by Barnier et al. [1, 2, 3] was called the “EU Patent” or something along those lines, but it’s just another gown/brand for what was known as community patent, “unification”, or something like the “harmonisation” McCreevy spoke about back in his days. Now they call it ‘Innovation Union’ (equating patents/monopolies with “innovation”) and a European patents booster (from the same blog of a patent attorney which offers tips on patenting software in Europe) says that the Belgian presidency (Vincent van Quickenborne) is its pusher:

According to a recent press release, the European Commission published a Communication entitled “Europe 2020 Flagship Initiative Innovation Union”, which identifies ten key points required for turning Europe into a true “Innovation Union”.

Axel H. Horns, another such attorney from Europe (Munich), is counting on Vincent van Quickenborne when he writes:

Mr Vincent van Quickenborne announcing talks on ‘enhanced co-operation’ instead of EU Patent – http://tinyurl.com/37hmmsx

As some background on Vincent van Quickenborne consider [1, 2, 3, 4]. “EU Council Press” gives him lip service, so he has become a dangerous person to software developers.

#EUPatent on the agenda of the Competitiveness #EUCouncil on 10 Dec. / CC @VincentVQ

That’s just marketing talk. Competitiveness is effectively promoted without patents (monopolies), not with more of them and not with increased “enforcement” (litigation). The EU Patent was seen falling just weeks ago, with Italy and Spain taking a leading role in shooting it down because they know better. EurActiv says pressure tactics may be used now. It’s appalling if true.

Italy found itself in a political squeeze on Thursday (25 November) as several key European countries moved to create a unified patent to protect the design of products sold across their borders.

There will be huge harm caused by software patents in Europe, including an open door to patent trolls in the long term. The president of the FFII warns:

Second BGH decision validating software patents in Germany, technical means the software runs in a computer http://ur1.ca/2fgca

He also points out that the “Irish Government [is] on the way to levy taxes over patent royalties, was serving Microsoft and Google to evade US fisc” (linking to this story).

The Government has revealed just how little faith it has in its vaunted “smart economy” by proposing the abolition of the one incentive SMEs had to create their own intellectual property (IP) – patent royalty tax exemptions – a leading patent lawyer has angrily railed.

Buried on page 96 of the ‘National Recovery Plan 2011 – 2014’ to remove €15bn from the State’s deficit and stimulate a recovery is a list of measures to be abolished.

Top of the list is the tax exemption for patent royalties.

It is followed by a number of other measures, like the abolition of investment allowance for machinery and plant and exploration expenditure, the approved Share Options Scheme and benefit in kind for employer-provided childcare.

Glyn Moody sarcastically states regarding the above: “lucky #swpats don’t exist ‘as such’”

Yes, Europe left ambiguity there with the phrase “as such”. There is an additional debate right now over software patents and web standards. The founder of the Web (Tim BL) opposes software patents. I asked him about it (noting that W3C leadership has vested interests in employers’ patents [1, 2, 3, 4]) and he clarified that W3C work must be royalty free. This led to a debate where Tim wrote: “#w3c work is #royaltyfree. That is *not* FRAND, as FRAND-0 can still require you get some license.”

Simon Phipps wrote: “But doesn’t “royalty free” also imply that other restrictions are permissible? Remember Sender ID was RF: http://bit.ly/dXecPy”

Carlo Piana wrote: “actually I’ve used W3C IPR policy as a good example for Open Standards, in the past. E/thing is perfectible tho’”

“…I’ve used W3C IPR policy as a good example for Open Standards, in the past.”
      –Carlo Piana
Mr. Oliva added: “but isn’t that *still* a subset of both FRAND and FRAND-0? [...] i.e., it’s not correct to say it’s *not* FRAND, but rather that it’s the non-evil subset of FRAND”

Glyn Moody also published “Tim BL: Open Standards Must be Royalty-Free”, wherein he argues:

There’s nothing radical or new there: after all, as he says, the W3C specifies that all its standards must be royalty-free. But it’s a useful re-statement of that policy – and especially important at a time when many are trying to paint Royalty-Free standards as hopeless unrealistic for open standards. The Web’s continuing success is the best counter-example we have to that view, and Berners-Lee’s essay is a splendid reminder of that fact. Do read it.

The head of the FSFE, who previously argued with the BSA over (F)RAND [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9], shares his “Christmas wish to the EPO”:

The European Commission is setting out to reform Europe’s standardisation system. About time, too. Standards define what things around us look and behave like, whether soft- or hardware. Standardisation in Europe is currently dominated by a small number of organisations, and they’ve mostly done their business quietly in a corner where not many people cared to look. Except the ones with a lot of money at stake, of course.

That explains why standardisation today is still a game that’s mostly played by big corporations. At the same time, much innovation is happening elsewhere, coming from individuals and small and medium-sized companies (SMEs). Their numbers are large, but they don’t really have a voice in standardisation. Where they could participate, they often lack the time, money and specialised expertise to do so.

Well, there has been lots of RAND-related news recently [1, 2, 3, 4] and all these issues matter a lot. In Europe, mobbyists seem to be promoting Microsoft agenda (including RAND) under the camouflage/costume of opposing software patents.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

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

6 Comments

  1. satipera said,

    November 28, 2010 at 6:10 am

    Gravatar

    There is nothing wrong with a EU patent or copyright system. What is wrong is if a bad system is implemented. I do applaud the efforts being taken by many people to stop a bad system being implemented but I just wanted to draw this distinction.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    What exactly do you refer to by “EU patent or copyright system”? I notice no capitalisation in “patent”. As you correctly point out, it’s an implementation issue and the “EU Patent” is like a package that’s a wolf in sheep clothing. Remember that ACTA too got ‘dressed up’ as means of stopping malicious (fake) drugs and Digital Economy Bill is all euphemisms and sob stories.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Economy_Act_2010

    The bill (or #DeBill) could just be called “Bob”, but it’s the actual details therein that matter.

    twitter Reply:

    Software patents are always bad and Europe should never recognize them. The EU has already endorsed ACTA, which is a terrible and confused piece of legislation that includes very bad copyright laws and bad patent laws. You should do everything you can to defeat ACTA which may drag software patents through the backdoor through the ill defined phrase “intellectual property” [2].

    ACTA is too large and confused to be passed. It should be thrown out and any useful parts considered separately. The Mobbiest will be inserting malicious changes into it before it passes and no one will get what they expect. It was created in secret and no one really wants it.

    PJ points to 35 year old records of the US debate about software patents. Her pick is worth quoting here,

    In 1967 programmers and computing companies almost uniformly resisted the idea of software patentability, proposed to them by the US Patent Office. Senator Brooks expressed alarm at the PO’s move to introduce software patents through a set of guidelines and demanded that these should be “set aside until … responsible officials at the policy-making levels of the executive and legislative branches of government have had an opportunity to take whatever action might be necessary to protect the public interest”. Patent lawyers and representatives of patent-experienced companies such as Bell Laboratories argued in favor of the PO’s move. BEMA and IBM argued that programs “are not within the present patent statutes and are not suitable for patent protection”. The chairman of the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) published a poll, according to which most programmers opposed to the idea of software patenting and stressed that “the vital issue of computer program patents should not be left to the deliberation of patent attorneys in government and industry”. This is a fairly detailed account of the struggle and the various positions at the time. It shows how little has changed in the 35 years since then.

    Software patents were then, as now, all about creating monopolies to protect the position of incumbent companies like Bell Labs. The insane results of software patents in the US is the clearest evidence of how bad they are.

    Dr. Roy Schestowitz Reply:

    That’s a pretty good find. A few days ago the FFII found some more recent paper from the UK (around 10 years ago) where the situation with regards to software patents gets discussed. At some stage the lobbyists usually manage to defeat logic.

  2. satipera said,

    November 28, 2010 at 9:47 am

    Gravatar

    To be a little clearer. As you know I have my problems with much of the proposed legislation and was not really commenting on it. As you picked up; my problem is not with European Union wide legislation, in fact I welcome it. The problem is the content of the legislation and how it has been influenced by industry lobbying and pressure from foreign governments. I just wanted to underline that distinction, lest we equate member state law good, Union law bad.

    twitter Reply:

    Bad laws like ACTA are worse when they are inflicted on many people at once by undemocratic means. They way ACTA was written and is being implemented is another reason to reject it. The confused use of the propaganda term “intellectual property” assures us that ACTA is both meaningless and malicious, and this is the primary reason it should be rejected.

What Else is New


  1. Justice Peter Huber Speaking to a Front Group of Team UPC May Compromise the Integrity of the FCC and Its Outcomes

    The public reaction, even from some legal professionals, isn't too positive, seeing how judges from BVerfG (FCC) speak to the mouthpieces of Team UPC (biased and in the pockets of the litigation 'industry')



  2. Injustice at Every Level Would Simply Doom the Entire Patent System

    Repeated failure to restore the Rule of Law and enforce accountability/oversight in Europe's patent system renders the entire system moot; it is a case of adherence to basic constitutional pillars



  3. Understanding Thierry Breton: Thierry and the $100 Billion Man

    Thierry Breton's connections to the tax avoidance ploy of his friend Bernard Arnault



  4. Links 21/11/2019: Mesa 19.3.0 RC4, Canonical SPS

    Links for the day



  5. Links 21/11/2019: Charmed OSM, Mesa 19.2.5, DXVK 1.4.5, Zorin OS 15 Lite

    Links for the day



  6. Understanding Thierry Breton: Atos Healthcare - “The Ugly Face of Business”

    "...2,380 people died after their claim for employment and support allowance (ESA) ended because a work capability assessment (WCA) found that they were found fit for work."



  7. IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, November 20, 2019

    IRC logs for Wednesday, November 20, 2019



  8. Microsoft Tim: Microsoft is Now Defending Linux

    The difference between fiction and reality



  9. Justice Peter Huber of the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) Calls 'Bullshit' a Rumour Nobody Really Spreads

    A sort of 'trial by media' (by Team UPC) compromises the integrity of the case (constitutional complaint) and can be interpreted as judges succumbing to lobbying/pressure from those who conspire to violate many constitutions across Europe for personal/financial gain



  10. Understanding Thierry Breton: What Thierry Did Next...

    "Whether by coincidence or not, when Atos announced in 2010 that it would acquire Siemens’ IT unit, it was the 32-year-old Macron at Rothschild who advised Breton on the deal."



  11. Links 20/11/2019: HONOR MagicBook With GNU/Linux, Coreboot 4.11, GNU Health Patchset 3.6.1

    Links for the day



  12. IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, November 19, 2019

    IRC logs for Tuesday, November 19, 2019



  13. EPO Geared Towards Financial Exploitation of Europe Instead of Serving Europe

    For the financial benefit of law firms and patent offices (they profit from processing loads of patents and lawsuits) Europe is being reverted back to Medieval Times when exercising invention and free thought (or free coding) was a luxury of the rich alone



  14. Microsoft and IBM Are the Patent Trolls, They Won't Protect Us From Trolls

    "Microsoft has no taste" and IBM has no taste, either; they're lying to our collective face together with OIN and the 'Linux' Foundation



  15. How Ralph Nader Put It

    Ralph Nader on money in politics



  16. ZDNet (CBS) Associates GNU/Linux Users With ISIS

    Response to "US student was allegedly building a custom Gentoo Linux distro for ISIS," just published by ZDNet and composed by their biggest troll, Catalin Cimpanu



  17. Understanding Thierry Breton: Noël Forgeard and His “Golden Parachute”

    The end of the first half of the Breton series; in this particular part we continue to cover the EADS scandal and the second half of this series will include the EPO connections (the vote in a plenary for Breton's nomination is due 27/11)



  18. Links 19/11/2019: Zswap's B-Tree Search Implementation, WordPress 5.2.4

    Links for the day



  19. We've Already Entered the Era When Patents Should be Presumed Invalid

    The abundance of low-quality patents may mean short-term profits for patent offices and law firms; but we know at whose expense they are profiting and the legitimacy of patent systems suffers as a result



  20. Jean-Luc Breton

    Breton a champion of obstruction and obfuscation



  21. Understanding Thierry Breton: Insider-Trading Scandal at EADS

    Although Breton was not directly implicated in the insider trading scandal itself he did come under fire in 2007 for the role he played in a side-show to the main story, namely the payment of a generous € 8.5m severance package to Noël Forgeard when the EADS co-CEO was compelled to resign in June 2006.



  22. Startpage is Not Denying Its Betrayal of Privacy, It is Just Being Evasive

    They can't call you a liar if you issue a non-denying 'denial'; the "Roll Safe Think About It" meme seems applicable here



  23. Guest Post: Open Source is Not Free Software

    "If you look at human history, you can see lots of similar ideas, movements, intellectuals who are affected by the power of the ruling class like this."



  24. IRC Proceedings: Monday, November 18, 2019

    IRC logs for Monday, November 18, 2019



  25. Links 19/11/2019: HPC Focus and LibreOffice 6.4 Beta

    Links for the day



  26. Understanding Thierry Breton: “Rhodiagate” and the Vivendi Universal Affair

    When the "Rhodia affair" became the "Breton affair"



  27. Links 18/11/2019: Last Linux RC, OSMC Updated

    Links for the day



  28. What GitHub is to Open Source

    Lots of prisoners inside GitHub



  29. Openwashing Institutionalised NPEs (OIN) and Software Patents With Notorious Managers From the EPO

    There’s a strong push for software patents in Europe (basically fake European Patents on abstract ideas) and IAM leads/participates in it with help from OIN, Grant Philpott (EPO) and — maybe soon — Breton (EU)



  30. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, November 17, 2019

    IRC logs for Sunday, November 17, 2019


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