Euro polls: Pact to protect free software? Opinions

corkie · 27-05-2009 1:08pm #1

Free software could become an election issue in the forthcoming Euro polls on 4 June with a group promoting a pact to protect software from government interference. Read more here

I normally stay away from politics and the issues surrounding them.
Unless it's a issue I feel strongly about.

For example, I was one of the founding members of IrelandOffline, but not an active member for the last few years due to conflicts of interest with my employment.

Please note there is also "corkie on politics.ie", which is not me, just in case people confuse us.

I will be reading more about this pact and commenting again on here.
What are other peoples opinions.

Regards,
John O Connell.
Disclaimer: My employment with DSGi ended on the Friday 8th May 2009.

turgon · 27-05-2009 1:55pm

I suppose one reason governments might be inclined to go with Microsoft etc, is those are companies that employ people. Thus Microsoft will stay in Ireland and provide jobs.

Rather than getting the CSO to rely on Linux, say.

Permabear · 27-05-2009 2:16pm

This post has been deleted.

Hitman Actual · 27-05-2009 2:49pm

I think you need to elaborate a bit more on what the issue actually is. I mean, I work in the tech sector, all-be-it in silicon IP which might not be relevant here, but I'm not sure what the problem is. What do you mean by "government interference"? And are you talking about open-source SW like OpenOffice or similar free apps? And, as donegalfella asks, what's this "free society" that you're on about? Is there some sort of belief out there that SW developers aren't entitled to be paid for their time and skills? The issue is a bit vague, tbh.

corkie · 27-05-2009 4:43pm

Getting to the heart of the Mater, following the news feed resulted in finding this site:
http://www.freesoftwarepact.eu/post/What-is-the-free-software-pact

Again I still need to explore and read this more my self, I hoping there refering to open source software and protection against EU patents laws etc.
Regards,
John O Connell.
P.S. I will be adding more links under the 'patents' tag as explore this more

Also i equate "Free" here as in FREEDOM, not (price/cost).

Permabear · 27-05-2009 5:36pm

This post has been deleted.

Scofflaw · 27-05-2009 5:49pm

That depends whether one's livelihood would be directly affected - and, more generally, whether the Internet can continue to be used as a medium for free expression by virtue of the freely available enabling software it now enjoys. Other issues may well be more serious in and of themselves, but these days our ability to discuss them, and to organise against them, is increasingly dependent on the Internet.

cordially,
Scofflaw

corkie · 27-05-2009 6:27pm

Did you order it online or did you buy it from your local high street computer retailer even though it would cost you more?

If i was still employed, I wouldn't have the freedom to freely discuss this on this medium.

It's more than just Linux and Patent law.
It's about protecting your freedom to choose or share information!
It's about how you listen to music and/or watch/stream entertainment.
It's about who you trust.

Do you trust larger multinationals cooperation's and or governments to act in public interest with regard to the powerful medium you now have the freedom of using with out >>> over in-forced <<< restriction's?
>>>> You have given great example's in your replies to where we need to protect them <<<
Regards,
John O Connell.

thebman · 27-05-2009 6:47pm

So this is about copyright law reform or preventing attempts by copyright holders to lobby for stronger rights for copyright holders?

And the same for software patents? Are they for eliminating them altogether or reform or do they want to prevent reform from other lobbyiests that want stronger rights for software patent holders?

Kind of confused as to what the movement is trying to achieve.

Permabear · 27-05-2009 6:49pm

This post has been deleted.

Permabear · 27-05-2009 7:01pm

This post has been deleted.

Scofflaw · 27-05-2009 7:09pm

You're quite correct that free software does not of itself produce free speech. However, the existence of free software has made the Internet marketplace vastly larger than it would have been if software like Apache didn't exist. That size alone makes the Internet vastly freer - if you don't like the repressive atmosphere of boards.ie, you can go to politics.ie, or a hundred thousand other discussion forums.

In turn, that software development isn't limited to a few large companies (say Sun, Microsoft, Apple) makes any government attempt to introduce restrictive licensing conditions (say, no server licensing for unapproved organisations, DRM, etc), backdoors (think Clipper chip), tracing, etc, into the servers that run the web.

Freedom depends on choice, choice depends on freedom. Simple, really.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Permabear · 27-05-2009 7:26pm

This post has been deleted.

corkie · 27-05-2009 7:32pm

I know I brought it up and due to "Confidential Clause", with my ex-employer. I (can not/ will not) discuss, the mater of how my employment ended. I am still in good terms, I believe with the same and have many friends/collogues still employed with the Company.

Yes we are govern by rules of law, both as employee's >> and as employers << and/or as citizens of the EU. This thread is about what the these rules should be, voted by society and not by cooperation's.

Regards,
John O Connell
CloudBooks.org

Scofflaw · 27-05-2009 8:06pm

Sigh - 'free' as in 'free speech', not as in 'free beer'.

All true, all misses the point.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Permabear · 27-05-2009 8:28pm

This post has been deleted.

sink · 27-05-2009 8:32pm

I'm not sure I follow, there seems to be some wires crossed somewhere. So first off let me seek clarification, when you mention "free software" are you talking in monetary terms or in terms of rights to freely produce, copy, distribute and modify software?

thebman · 27-05-2009 8:44pm

Well I think the main advantage of open source is the ability for everyone to stand on the shoulders of giants and to form giant programming groups themselves.

It also enables small businesses to compete with larger businesses easier as they can take an open source project and tweak it and market it to other businesses.

I don't know if allowing free speech is the right word but it certainly reduces the cost of entry to create your own web presence so you could say it helps to promote free speech because of that I think as it reduces the cost of entry and places almost no restrictions on the person using the software or setting up the server.

If people had to buy VBulletin they might not be able to launch a forum but many communities exist based on YABB or PHPBB, both open source.

You can say the government could restrict access to sites etc... like China but isn't that the point of getting the right to freedom of speech on the Internet on the agenda for the EU. So that they will support it in all but the most extreme case (ie. child porn).

Scofflaw · 27-05-2009 9:49pm

I'm not sure you understand what software patents would mean (although I'm sure you'll say you do). vBulletin probably wouldn't exist if someone else had patented "bulletin board software". The existence of Open Source is predicated on the absence or unenforceability of software patents - but so is virtually every other usable piece of non-multinational software.

regards,
Scofflaw

Permabear · 27-05-2009 10:17pm

This post has been deleted.

Scofflaw · 27-05-2009 10:21pm

What it says, most likely.

Well, now it is, yes. Hindsight is great like that. You'd find it hard to get a patent on light-bulbs these days, too.

regards,
Scofflaw

Permabear · 27-05-2009 10:27pm

This post has been deleted.

Scofflaw · 27-05-2009 10:34pm

No, you claimed that bulletin board software would not be non-obvious, which is certainly now true.

regards,
Scofflaw

Permabear · 27-05-2009 10:40pm

This post has been deleted.

Scofflaw · 27-05-2009 10:43pm

Yeees - and if someone had patented the idea then? After all, implementation is not required for a patent.

regards,
Scofflaw

thebman · 27-05-2009 10:47pm

lol there are many ridiculous software patents.

The URL is patented, the double click was patented, playing your own music on the Xbox's interface when playing a game is patented.

They are all obvious ideas that got through the patent office. Any fool could have come with the Xbox one, it is a fairly obvious invention. Its not like the concept of playing music in a game isn't obvious or allowing users to have a choice of songs so why was this allowed to be patented?

Permabear · 27-05-2009 10:51pm

This post has been deleted.

nesf · 27-05-2009 11:02pm

You'd be shocked at what patents software companies have managed to get. Amazon got a patent on "1-Click" purchasing iirc.

Permabear · 27-05-2009 11:13pm

This post has been deleted.

Scofflaw · 27-05-2009 11:14pm

Hush now. donegalfella is never wrong. If he says those things are too ridiculous to get patents, then like the wheel, they can clearly never ever be patented. We are protected by the common sense of patent authorities and their deep knowledge of what is non-obvious in an extremely fast-moving field. If that fails them, they can ask donegalfella, who will set them straight.

I'm going to stop now, I think. donegalfella is virtually the only person on boards.ie who I don't consider it worth getting into a discussion with.

cordially,
Scofflaw

thebman · 27-05-2009 11:37pm

Wait shouldn't a Libertarian Anarchist be against software patents anyway?

They prevent competition.

croo · 01-06-2009 10:05pm

One point that is, perhaps, not well known is that even though software patents are not legal in Europe, the European Patent Office has been awarding Software Patents! If patents on software are made legal, overnight just about everything done by software today will require royalties be paid. For an idea of what kind of things have already been awarded patent in Europe checkout the right-hand column of http://stopsoftwarepatents.eu/211000297544/

People may argue that these can be challenged in court, but this is typically a very expensive process. Effectively money will be the deciding factor in a companies ability to protect their own IP or challange anothers.

View · 02-06-2009 8:00am

All very well, but the European Patent Office is not an EU institution and, hence, the "Euro Polls" (i.e. EP elections) mentioned in thread title has nothing to do with it. Also, since the EPO has already issued patents on software, there is probably a legal basis under the European Patent Convention, for them having done so.

croo · 02-06-2009 9:49am

The EPO may not be an EU institution but the EU will decide if the software patents issued by it may be enforced or not so it is very relevant to the up coming elections. We only very narrowly escaped software patents the last time the commission tried to introduce them, mostly because our representatives at the European Parliament were ill informed.

View · 02-06-2009 10:29am

Well, maybe I am missing the point but:

Most, if not all, EU states are signatories to the European Patent Convention,
The EPO already issues software patents,
Hence, EPO issued software patents are presumably already legally accepted and enforcable in all EU states.

So, why does it matter if the EU as a whole decides to formally recognise EPO issued patents if the individual member states recognise them already?

Please enlighten me!

croo · 02-06-2009 10:57am

Actually, no they aren't - this is the point. But, the EPO can make money processing Software Patents so it does so even though they are not enforceable (the enforceability is actually a country by country decision but most don't recognise software patents and if they do only in a very limited scenario). Companies have acquired patents in the hope that will become enforceable in which case they will have themselves a little royalties "cash cow" .. as I said look at the link to see some of the very basic software processes for which EPO patents are currently awarded.

corkie · 02-06-2009 1:29pm

Quote from here :-> The 8 most successful open source products ever

There is more Open Source Platforms as well, where the very app's or programs you use on a daily basis, could have been built on top of these platforms: -

Quote from here :-> The fight over open source 'leeches'

Regards,
John.

View · 03-06-2009 8:55am

Okay, thanks for the clarification. I have to say my opinion of the usefulness of a patent from the EPO has just nose-dived (irrespective of what the patents were granted to cover).

A Primal Nut · 03-06-2009 12:05pm

Whatever corporation you work for will always be the one who defines the rules, not society. If you don't like the rules your corporation employs, find another employer.

Permabear · 05-06-2009 6:05pm

This post has been deleted.

oscarBravo · 05-06-2009 8:38pm

I would be very supportive of the idea of source code as a copyrightable work. The idea that an algorithm is a patentable invention, however, is just... wrong.

Scofflaw · 05-06-2009 9:05pm

Personally, I tend to view it as very similar to music. There is a limited vocabulary in any given language, and while anyone can produce some arrangement of 'notes', the difference between a genius and a pedestrian software author is very similar to that between composers. The idea, too, that anyone could patent a particular chord is inherently ridiculous.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Euro polls: Pact to protect free software? Opinions

Comments