[Patents] FFII Database of European Software Patents and Press Conference

[Bernard Lang Bernard.Lang@inria.fr]

On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 09:32:54PM +0100, PILCH Hartmut wrote:
> in reply to Greg 
> > >... I wouldn't have put his comment into the press release, because I
> > >... know that patent specialists like you will tend to treat it as
> > >... silly disinformation.
> 
> > Hartmut,  Are your addicted to always insulting people you disagree
> > with?  
> 
> Like calling the other's arguments "silly" and "unserious" (see below)?

Greg (with some good reasons) is looking too hard for a nasty remark
from Hartmut...  it was not there
 
> > In fact, if you were really serious about these issues, you would
> > figure a way to sue EPO in some European court to force them to
> > stop issuing patents until they can prove that they can do a good
> > a job as required by the EPC.
> 
> Your strategy would take a huge effort.
> It would be much easier to sue the EPO to force them to stop issuing
> patents on problems whose solution consists in writing a computer program.
> Because that is what the written law says and what it was intended to say.
> But even that is such a huge work that we don't have the means to do it.
> That doesn't mean we aren't serious about doing what we have the means to
> do.

I suspect you are both wrong.  The EPO cannot be sued by any individual,
only by a state.

> > The problem isn't the laws (though I agree that 52c should be changed)
> 
> Important moments of history reveal on which side your heart stands.  Very
> few people can keep their dark sides to themselves in such
> situations.  But the readers of this list will remember where Greg
> Aharonian stood, when programming freedom for the world was at stake.

I do not strongly disagree with Hartmut, but one can be wrong in good
faith.  However I have learned to know that good faith is often quite
easy an excuse.  But (hopefully) I would have passed, since it will
bring nothing to the discussion.
 
> Almost all patent professionals believe that securing a playground for
> themselves is more important than securing freedom of expression and
> freedom of programming, and that programmers should be conscripted for
> compulsory service in cleaning up that playground.


Here there is a real issue of free speech.  Writing programs is a way
of expressing ideas, and exchanging ideas, especially in a world more
and more dominated by computers and multimedia expression.  There are
probably more programmers than writers, and one need no investment
capital for creative computing.
  Software patenting get in the way of freedom of speech, since one
can be sued for infringement for having expressed an idea with a
program.
 There are other ways in which it is contrary to freedom of speech,
for example when communication protocols, imposed by private
companies, are also protected by patents.

   But I also wish to thank Greg, as our first living example of the
direct use of software patents against freedom of speech, through yet
another technique: the fact that everyone will become one way or
another an infringer.

  Bernard

-- 
         Non aux Brevets Logiciels  -  No to Software Patents
           SIGNEZ    http://petition.eurolinux.org/    SIGN

Bernard.Lang@inria.fr             ,_  /\o    \o/    Tel  +33 1 3963 5644
http://pauillac.inria.fr/~lang/  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  Fax  +33 1 3963 5469
            INRIA / B.P. 105 / 78153 Le Chesnay CEDEX / France
         Je n'exprime que mon opinion - I express only my opinion
                 CAGED BEHIND WINDOWS or FREE WITH LINUX