At Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:15:32 +0100, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Tue, 2005-01-11 at 09:43 +0100, Jerome Alet wrote:
Hi all,
In the light of the recent BIG event of IBM patents being made available to free software developpers, I'm wondering :
- couldn't this be used by the pro-patent lobby to make software patents become a reality in Europe ?
any comment ?
I see it the opposite way, anti-patent lobby can easily say: see IBM the most important patent owner and early patent adopter in the information science world has recognized that patents are effectively a threat to one of the most important way of producing software today, and because of that they released them to FS producers.
But ultimately I think that anybody can twist the meaning unless IBM explicitly tell the political reason that made them do the move.
I think those are pretty clear. See also the following NoSoftwarePatents.com press release (http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=288):
NOSOFTWAREPATENTS.COM CRITICIZES IBM FOR "DIVERSIONARY TACTICS", "AGGRESSIVE PATENT LOBBYING" AND "SQUEEZING" IN CONNECTION WITH IBM's REPORTED RELEASE OF 500 PATENTS FOR OPEN-SOURCE USE
Munich (11 January 2005). Media reports appeared last night acording to which IBM now allows open-source software developers to use 500 of its approximately 40,000 patents. Florian Mueller, campaign manager of NoSoftwarePatents.com, commented on IBM's move:
[start quote]
Recently IBM made an unsubstantial non-aggression promise with respect to Linux, and now they show off again. It's just diversionary tactics. Let's put this into perspective: We're talking about roughly 1% of IBM's worldwide patent portfolio. They file that number of patents in about a month's time.
In Europe, IBM is a driving force behind the extension of the scope of patentability with respect to software. If IBM wants to assume the role of a post-Christmas benefactor, they'd better stop their aggressive patent lobbying in the EU and their shameless squeezing of small and medium-sized companies with that IBM "patent tax". Let's take it from there. We can still talk about some kind of patent pittance after that.
[end quote]
Jeroen Dekkers