The man whose job is to pass
anti-Free(dom) software laws
André Rebentisch points out that in these documents from the EU Commission exists evidence that it actually strives -- not just considers -- to create a back door for software patents to enter the continent. Here is the man to watch out for:
Mr Michel BARNIER
Commissioner designate âËâ We should work to make real progress on free movement of services, beginning with a full implementation of the Services Directive. A review of the professional qualifications legislation will also be needed. âËâ As to public procurement and intellectual property rights, you will take the lead on our efforts to secure the adoption of a Community patent, and developing effective policy for the enforcement of intellectual property rights. âËâ Integrated, efficient and safe financial markets are needed more than ever to help the EU economy grow again. However, the EU’s regulatory framework and the supervisory structures must be strengthened, and you will have a key role to ensure this happens. To help you fulfil your responsibilities, DG MARKT will be under your authority as well as the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM).
Microsoft will document "additional information" to ECMA 376 and will comply with ECMA 376 1st January and shields the freedom to create software as a work of art pour l'art.
The Novell contract was an agreement meant to bring Open Source under Microsoft's control. Steve Ballmer was surprised when the Open Source movement defeated the contract by simply boycotting Novell.
Secretive Patent Holder Sues Lots Of Companies For Remote Activation Software
[...]
Obviously, none of those companies could have come up with ways to remotely activate software without this patent (yes, that's sarcasm). As the Register notes in the link above, even some of the software products listed as violating this patent don't seem to involve activation at all, raising serious questions about how they could possibly violate this patent. This sounds like yet another case of someone having read the book Rembrandt's in the Attic and deciding to go trolling for companies to sue with a meaningless patent.
"Small Software companies cannot afford to go to court or pay damages. Who is this software patent system for?" —Marco Schulze, Nightlabs Gmbh
Comments
Needs Sunlight
2009-12-18 18:12:45
Needs Sunlight
2009-12-18 18:15:25
"Small companies cannot afford to go to court or pay damages. Who is this software patent system for?"
Roy Schestowitz
2009-12-18 18:43:30
Jose_X
2009-12-19 05:17:03
Jose_X
2009-12-19 05:19:03
Jose_X
2009-12-19 05:22:38
>> Mr. Müller asked us to mention that he views those awards and honors as "a recognition of what our overall resistance movement achieved". He stresses that he owes his nominations "to all activists and citizens who supported our cause, especially to the FFII (Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure)".
What I am saying is that I worry that giving the award (directly or indirectly) was a way to make concession (tip hat) to a worthy foe but ultimately not give in.
Jose_X
2009-12-19 06:41:31
I think the lesson to be learned is that this is a constant battle.
What we have to show is that the more time passes, the more people dislike patents and associate the monopolies with an abuse of power, an infringement on people's rights, a decrease in competition and in innovation, an increase in costs, a consolidation of power, etc.
[I posted this the other day: http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2009/12/predicted-2009-patent-application-filings.html?cid=6a00d8341c588553ef0128765f242c970c#comment-6a00d8341c588553ef0128765f242c970c ]
Roy Schestowitz
2009-12-19 09:04:08