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

04.22.11

Steven Lundberg Uses Gymnastics in Logic in Order to Sell Software Patents

Posted in Deception, Intellectual Monopoly, Patents at 10:08 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Surrender to software parents or people will die?

Steven Lundberg

Summary: Monopolies on algorithms are advocated by yet another attorney who taxes science using patent monopolies and the associated bureaucracy

Steven Lundberg, somewhat of a lobbyist for software patent policies who has a blog fully dedicated just for this purpose, is still at it. The firm he is in, Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner, apparently agrees with these actions of his because its name is put near it. Does that make him, Mr. Lundberg, a representative? “Here’s a Question for Opponents of Software Patents” says his new bit of deception (in the National Law Review), which goes like this: “Ok, here’s a question for the opponents of software patents: If software patents are such a drag on the software industry, why don’t the countries with weak or non-existent software patents, or at least countries with relatively few software patents, have the most innovative software industries? Perhaps they do, but I have never seen any stats supporting that proposition. It is well known and irrefutable that countries that had little or no protection for pharmaceuticals also had virtually no ethical (innovative) pharmaceutical companies. Is not the same true for software patents?”

“Microsoft and the rest of the US software industry had no patents when it was building its empire. So that answers your question right there.”
      –Pamela Jones, Groklaw
Due to matters of scarcity and the process which may be involved in stepping inside a patent, these two are not comparable. Moreover, it’s a disingenuous attempt to compare the question about software patents to a life or death situation/dilemma. Someone asked us to address the subject today and it is probably quite timely, especially because there are Mono thugs who falsely try to suggest that I endorse patents (they spread this lie today); people in academic settings who apply for patents or receive grants from pharmaceutical companies such as AstaZeneca (their role then typically becomes to push the grant giver’s agenda in peer-reviewed journals or corrupt publications like Elsevier’s, where bribe money buys placements, e.g. Merck’s, but that’s another subject) sometimes apply for patents, but I do not and I never will; to attribute to me the preferences of some other academics is absolutely ridiculous and unfair. It’s a gross generalisation. When universities amass monopolies or even funding from companies (I am funded by the ERC by the way, so no such conflict arises), then it’s another matter altogether. It’s really dodgy stuff sometimes and I rarely restrain my scepticism.

But let’s go to the subject matter (pun intended), which is patents on drug-making. We actually addressed this subject on numerous occasions before, especially around 2009 when we also shared videos that debunk these commonly-repeated myths (e.g. patents as life savers). A few hours ago I had a one-hour conversation with a fellow professor who had researched this field for decades and he too is cynical about it. Today he explained how the vast majority of the pharmaceutical companies’ output [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8] is not effective or hardly effective but because they stick together like a cartel, they can carry on selling drugs and making massive profits which they then funnel into bonuses and a lot of marketing that affects perception, not effectiveness of treatments. It’s a sure way to make money, which is what they’re all about. Patents to them are often means for excluding competitors (e.g. generics) and hiking/elevating prices to the point where the customer can barely bear it. So these patents too have their room for doubt, as we explained very recently. There is still no justification for comparing these to software development, which someone can do while traveling on the train. It is the old trick of improper analogies to support one’s weak case. Groklaw responds to Lundberg by writing: “First, it’s a mistake to compare pharma with software. The development model is too different. Second, Microsoft and the rest of the US software industry had no patents when it was building its empire. So that answers your question right there. And as for being a drag, Gates himself said if there had been patents allowed on software when he was starting Microsoft, he would have failed. And even Justice Breyer in the Microsoft v. i4i oral argument indicated an awareness that there are problems from issued patents, so it’s too late to pretend that nothing bad happened from allowing patents on software. If you continue to deny reality, you will allow incumbents to destroy Linux and other FOSS software, which is a very foolish economic decision on your part, since it benefits only a convicted monopolist.”

One need not expect Steven Lundberg to be persuaded or to change his mind. He is in it for the money, not the science, but it is important to ensure he cannot bamboozle scientists into thinking he is on their side. Schwegman, Lundberg & Woessner is not the voice of reason.

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

A Single Comment

  1. twitter said,

    April 22, 2011 at 6:36 pm

    Gravatar

    It is interesting but predictable that a patent promoter would make such a vile and wrong comparison. It is impossible to compare pharmacy to software because software is not an invention and does not deserve a patent monopoly. The only reason people would compare a drug to a business method or math is that they have a wrong headed view of law promoted by the people who invented the term “intellectual property“. That entitlement philosophy also leads people to value profits over medicine for their neighbors. People who promote yet more patent power are ignorant of the science they hinder and equally ignorant or indifferent to the social costs.

    If we let these craven people have their way, they will take us all the way back to Patent Medicines, dubious compounds sold under legal authority (the king’s letters patent or modern equivalents) rather than scientific evidence and empirical results. Already they spend more money advertising directly to the public than actual research, so that patients come to doctors demanding pills for made up diseases. More serious corruptions have been alleged aimed at doctors and scientists themselves. Fake journals and intimidation of doctors and scientists represent an attack on science itself. Now watch them swoop in on growing weeds, which like patent medicines of the past at least alleviate symptoms of those unable to find or afford real care.

What Else is New


  1. Today's Example of Microsoft's Faked 'Love'

    “On 7 September 2017, users began noticing a message that stated “Skype for Business is now Microsoft Teams”. This was confirmed on 25 September 2017, at Microsoft’s annual Ignite conference,” according to Wikipedia



  2. Links 10/12/2019: Kubernetes 1.17, Debian Init Systems GR

    Links for the day



  3. 'Cancel Culture' as 'Thoughtpolice' Creep

    Richard Stallman spoke about an important aspect of censorship more than 2 decades ago (before “Open Source” even existed); it was published in Datamation (“Censoring My Software”) 23 years before a campaign of defamation on the Internet was used to remove him from MIT and FSF (censoring or ‘canceling’ Stallman himself)



  4. Microsoft Still Hates GNU/Linux and Mark Shuttleworth Knows It (But He is Desperate for Money)

    We're supposed to believe that a PR or image management (reputation laundering) campaign alone can turn Microsoft from GNU/Linux foe into friend/ally



  5. Actions Against EPO Corruption and Unitary Patent (UPC) Injustice/Lobbying

    The EPO is apparently going on strike again and an action against the UPC is scheduled for later this week (protest in Brussels)



  6. “The Fifth Freedom as a Meme”

    The issue with systemd (or SystemD) has provoked or at least stimulated discussions about the limits of the famous Four Freedoms



  7. IRC Proceedings: Monday, December 09, 2019

    IRC logs for Monday, December 09, 2019



  8. Demonstration Against Unitary Software Patents, Thursday 12 Dec in Brussels

    FFII's call to demonstrate against the UPC



  9. Links 9/12/2019: China on GNU/Linux, Canonical Wants Help to Improve Ubuntu

    Links for the day



  10. Links 9/12/2019: Linux 5.5 RC1, EasyOS Buster 2.1.9

    Links for the day



  11. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, December 08, 2019

    IRC logs for Sunday, December 08, 2019



  12. Mandatory Education for Those Who Use and Misuse Buzzwords Would Go a Long Way

    In an age of substitution — where marketing terms replace meaningful words and concepts — it has gotten more difficult to have honest debates, for example about the scope of patents



  13. Once Upon a Time Banter Was Allowed on Mailing Lists

    Hours ago Torvalds announced RC1 of the next Linux (kernel) release; it has been a while since he last said something ‘controversial’ (following his month at the penalty box); free speech deficit can make us weaker, not stronger (advantage to those who work in the dark)



  14. Links 8/12/2019: Debian Init Systems GR, NomadBSD 1.3

    Links for the day



  15. Can We Quit Celebrating DRM in GNU/Linux?

    Over the past couple of days various news sites and "Linux" sites expressed great satisfaction [1-5] over the passive embrace of Disney's DRM ploy (Disney+), even when Disney itself rejects DRM, seeing the harms practically caused by it [6,7]



  16. You Know WSL is Bad for GNU/Linux Because Anti-Linux People, Microsoft and Its Propagandists, Want People to Use That

    Microsoft and its boosters (and media partners) haven’t grown tired of spreading falsehoods to stigmatise and take control of GNU/Linux by creating their own versions and traps for it



  17. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, December 07, 2019

    IRC logs for Saturday, December 07, 2019



  18. 5 Years Ago the Linux Foundation Turned Linux.com Into a Non-Linux Site

    One can leverage the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine to better understand how, over time, the Foundation called “Linux” deviated or diverged away from its mission statement for the sole purpose of raising corporate funds and selling influence to corporations (passing the community’s hard work to them — a form of tacit privatisation)



  19. Microsoft Redefining Ownership and Identity of GNU/Linux

    The idea that “Microsoft loves Linux” is as insane as it gets; but the lie which is “Microsoft loves Linux” is a powerful enabler of Microsoft entryism, e.g. if Greg steps down, does a Microsoft employee become the deputy of Linus Torvalds?



  20. Things That Cannot Be Said

    The limits on what we can say are mostly defined by what sources permit us to say publicly (for the sake of source protection)



  21. Fake European Patents (on Algorithms) Leading to Fake Embargoes

    Law firms have gotten their way in Germany; instead of supporting the productive workers the patent system is nowadays promoting the litigation 'industry' and it ought to be corrected



  22. From Moderate Advice to FUD and Misinformation: The Case of a VPN Vulnerability (CVE-2019-14899)

    What should have been a trivial bugfix in a variety of operating systems and bits of software — both proprietary and Free software — somehow became anti-Linux FUD, clickbait and worse



  23. Dangerous Thinker

    Society oughtn't be alarmed by people who say unusual things; it should be wary and sceptical of those corporations ever so eager to silence such people



  24. Unitary Patent (UPC) Died Along With the Credibility of Managing IP and the Rest of the UPC Lobby

    It is pretty astounding that Team UPC (collective term for people who crafted and lobby for this illegal construct) is still telling us lies, even in the absence of underlying supportive facts, and pressure groups disguised as "news sites" latch onto anything to perpetuate an illusion of progress (even in the face of a growing number of major barriers)



  25. IRC Proceedings: Friday, December 06, 2019

    IRC logs for Friday, December 06, 2019



  26. Links 7/12/2019: Fedora 31 Elections Results, Lots of Media Drama Over VPN Bug

    Links for the day



  27. Links 6/12/2019: DRM in GNU/Linux and Sparky Bonsai

    Links for the day



  28. The EPO Rejects Innovation

    The EPO ceased caring about the needs of scientists whose work involves invention; instead, EPO management crafts increasingly lenient guidelines that yield illegal European Patents (not compatible with the EPC) that heavily-besieged EPO judges are unable to stop



  29. Startpage CEO Robert Beens in 'Damage Control' Mode, Trying to Get Startpage Relisted After Selling to a Massive Surveillance Company

    PrivacytoolsIO is being lobbied by the CEO of Startpage to relist Startpage, based on no actual refutations at all



  30. IRC Proceedings: Thursday, December 05, 2019

    IRC logs for Thursday, December 05, 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