This book was recently reviewed on Slashdot. I haven't checked
it out yet, but I thought it might contain useful pragmatic
arguments.
"Innovation Happens Elsewhere: Open Source as Business Strategy"
by Ron Goldman, Richard P. Gabriel
A version is available on-line under a creative commons license
(Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0):
http://dreamsongs.com/IHE/IHE.html
The slashdot review gives a summary:
http://books.slashdot.org/books/05/12/21/1514250.shtml?tid=187&tid=218&tid=6
Good luck,
Malcolm.
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Photos NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo http://uk.photos.yahoo.com
Sent to [Upd-discuss] by Seth Johnson. It is referring to IPRED2.
Teresa
-------- Original Message --------
> http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/12/09/business/patent.php
Prison over patents? Proposed EU law unites foes
By Paul Meller The New York Times
FRIDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2005
BRUSSELS For once, declared adversaries are on the same side of
an argument in the technology industry: They are urging European
lawmakers to drop legislation that would impose prison time on
patent violators, which they say would stifle innovation across
Europe.
Heavyweights like Nokia and Microsoft on one hand, and the
grass-roots Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure on
the other, are making common cause against wide-ranging
legislation proposed by the European Commission that would
criminalize all intellectual property infringements, including
patent violations. The law would provide blanket protection to
all forms of intellectual property across the 25 countries of the
Union.
A World Trade Organization treaty covering European Union
countries allows prison sentences for copyright and trademark
infringement, but it does not cover patents, which are variously
protected in member countries, mostly by the threat of fines.
The European Commission, which is readying the law for debate in
2006, was emboldened by a ruling by Europe's top court in
September that allowed criminal sanctions in enforcing European
laws. The intellectual property proposal would be the first
Europewide law to make use of the new powers.
But an early skirmish, drawing opponents from the technology,
heavy industry and drug sectors, is beginning.
Tim Frain, director of intellectual property at Nokia, called the
inclusion of patents within the scope of a European law
"ludicrous." Frain, who is based near London, advises managers at
Nokia on the risks of infringing existing patents when they
develop new functions for mobile phones.
Frain indicated that patent holders wanted protection but not
penalties of imprisonment as they tested the boundaries of other
patents. "It's never black and white," he said. "Sometimes
third-party patents are so weak that I advise managers to go
ahead and innovate because, after making a risk analysis, we feel
we can safely challenge the existing patent."
He added, "But with this law, even if I'm certain the existing
patent is no good, the manager involved would be criminally
liable."
Hartmut Pilch, a campaigner with Foundation for a Free
Information Infrastructure, said, "It is hard to predict what the
impact of this law would be because it would be enforced at a
national level, by national police forces, who I am sure have
much better things to do than to chase petty patent
infringements."
Less than six months ago, he and Frain were on opposite sides of
a fiercely fought lobbying battle over a proposed law on software
patents. But the latest proposal has brought the two together.
"This law doesn't make much sense for anyone in the patent
world," Pilch said.
The commission, however, takes the opposite view. "Regarding the
substance of the proposal, our view is the reverse of the people
you have been speaking to," said Friso Roscam Abbing, a
commission spokesman on justice issues. "We believe that we need
to protect innovators, therefore we want to send a strong signal
to those people infringing intellectual property that they face
criminal sanctions."
The aim of the draft law is to harmonize the various laws across
Europe to deter counterfeiting of medicines, watches, designer
clothes, music, movies and many other things. It follows a string
of laws passed in the EU over the last six years to help
designers and inventors protect themselves from imitators, who
can churn out copycat products at a fraction of the price of the
originals. Better protection of European creations is seen as a
way to foster innovation.
But the proposed new law would have the opposite effect, critics
say. "The law could trigger abusive criminal litigation, which
would have a chilling effect on innovation," said Francisco
Mingorance, European affairs manager at the Business Software
Alliance, a trade body that represents Microsoft and Apple
Computer, among others, in Brussels.
Some of the biggest patent owners have themselves been accused of
patent infringement. Microsoft owns around 5,000 patents and is
currently fighting 32 infringement claims, the company's
spokesman in Brussels, Tom Brookes, said.
Greg Perry, director general of the European Generic Medicines
Association in Brussels, described the plan to criminalize patent
infringements as "nonsense."
"At times, researchers need to breach an existing patent in order
to challenge it," he said. "With this law in place, it would be
the end of your career, and probably your company's too, if you
were found guilty under criminal law."
Generic-drug producers are constantly battling makers of patented
drugs for the right to reproduce their most popular pills.
Pharmaceutical companies try to keep the patent monopoly on their
best-selling drugs as long as they can. Indeed, in June, the
commission found the British pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca
guilty of abusing the patent protection on its anti-ulcer drug,
Losec.
"By criminalizing this whole area, lawmakers will be putting a
steel-ring-fence around drug patents, many of which may not be
justified," Perry said.
For the music and film industry, the law adds little to their
legal armory. "We are grateful for the efforts of the European
Commission to protect intellectual property, but in the fight
against copyright abuse, this is a modest proposal," said Thomas
Dillon, legal counsel in Brussels for the Motion Picture
Association, which represents most Hollywood studios.
"This proposed law doesn't add anything for us," he said. "The
only area where it does have a new effect is in its inclusion of
patents."
Tomorrow's the third Tuesday of the month, so there'll be the usual meeting
at eight o'clock.
Items for the agenda?
Off the top of my head:
* The AGM
* Amending the constitution - proposals for the AGM (nothing major expected)
* Getting press photos taken
* what was good and what needs improvement in our event organising
* Free Software in Northern Ireland (a 2006 event with Perens & Stallman)
* report from the Newry workshop (which I & others will attend on Tues morning)
Any other items?
Here's a photo of the usual venue:
http://www.ifso.ie/images/mahaffys.jpeg
and a map to it:
http://www.ifso.ie/images/mahaffeys.png
--
Ciarán O'Riordan, ___________/ Support FSFE's campaigns against IPRED2
http://ciaran.compsoc.com/ _/ and software patents by joining the Fellowship
___________________________/ and encouraging others to do so http://fsfe.org
[http://news.ft.com/cms/s/2dbad542-6d11-11da-90c2-0000779e2340.html]
>From Mr John Kennedy.
Sir, Music creators, consumers and entrepreneurs with a genuine interest in
digital music will do well to disregard Cory Doctorow's views on digital rights
management ("Vaudeville offers a music lesson for Sony BMG", December 12).
DRM is essential for making music available legally online and is key to any
industry dealing in intellectual property. It allows consumers to choose
between a variety of different ways to buy music online - be it a download, a
subscription or a song for rent.
It tailors the price of the music to the consumer's use of it. It also ensures
that royalties are channelled correctly to each of the different rights owners
involved in the sale of a music track.
DRM has largely been a success to date. It has been crucial to the development
of hundreds of new digital services in the past two years, all offering fans
new, flexible ways of enjoying music.
When consumers have problems playing their music on different players, that is
nothing to do with DRM but rather with decisions made by technology companies
to invest in proprietary devices and services that are not mutually
compatible.
The music industry supports interoperability as much as the consumer, but that
is a totally separate discussion from the value of DRM.
John Kennedy,
Chairman and Chief Executive,
IFPI
London W1B 5RE
(International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, representing the
recording industry worldwide)
[The Cory Doctorow article is only available online in full to
subscribers.]
Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
> Looks interesting, and I arrive on the night of Dec
19th, so I'll see you
> there.
>
Thanks Ciaran - I'm glad to hear you can make it!
Brian
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
All,
Here are the attachments in a more gnu-friendly
format!
Regards,
Brian
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
