FSFE-IE March 2005

fsfe-ie@lists.fsfe.org

24 participants
58 discussions

Previous meeting with MEP Brian Crowley
by Ciaran O'Riordan 01 Apr '05

01 Apr '05

In my last mail I mentioned my previous discussion with Crowley, but I just remembered that I didn't post a similar summary for that meeting, so here goes. It was March 4th. He thinks the directive can be fixed in the second reading. This was his reason for being the only JURI rep to vote against a return to a first reading ("restart" vote of Feb 2nd). This was in contrast to FFII's belief that the Council's text was too flawed to be fixable. He noted that a problem is that the EP has a very hard time with this technical sort of directive. He said that the USA and Asia are "4 years ahead of us on laws like this", and that the EU is being slow implementing "the 1996 agreemnt" (presumably TRIPS). He told me that patents give much stronger protection than copyrights, and "as a musician myself, I know musicians would much rather patent their music than copyright it". This sparked a debate about copyright. It somehow started with him saying that I can't copyright the word "record", because copyright requires that the work be new and innovative. I asked if he was confusing copyright and patents, but he said no, copyright is only granted if the work is new and innovative. He backed up his copyright beliefs by citing a George Harrison copyright case. Crowley said that Harrison lost the case despite never having heard the music it was claimed he copied. Thus, copyright required newness, and Harisson lost because his work was not new. On later research, I read that Harrison never claimed not to have heard the song he was accused of copying. Crowley had clearly mixed up the facts, or had mixed up facts fed to him. Back to the patent directive, he said that the Council text was a compromise since they kept half of the EP's amendments, and he said that the EP could bin the whole thing in the end anyway if the Council's second reading and reconciliation falls through. IFSO had little contact with Crowley in the first reading, we assumed he understood the issue since he tabled FFII amendments, but it seems now that he has some misinformation to be corrected, and that maybe he doesn't share IFSOs level of concern over this issue. -- Ciarán O'Riordan, http://www.compsoc.com/~coriordan/ Have you signed up to help FSF Europe yet? http://www.fsfe.org/

5 4

Met MEP Mairead McGuinness
by Ciaran O'Riordan 31 Mar '05

31 Mar '05

Thanks to Barry O'Donovan for getting McGuinness interested in meeting us. I met her yesterday morning. On this directive, her only meetings were two previous meetings with pro-patent types. She told me she didn't want to take a position until she'd heard all the sides. Being a new MEP, she didn't have the benefit of the 2003 lobbying, so we discussed the basics as well as the current situation. I think by the end she was seeing the sense in our side (or the nonsense in our opponents side). She found it difficult to understand the current situation whereby software patents are not valid but 30,000 have been granted. I did my best to explain that they were speculative patents, 75% owned by the USA and Japan. She had some doubt about the position of the anti-swpat campaign's position after discussions with Brian Crowley. This doubt wasn't about whether we were right or wrong, but about whether we were misguided about the severity of the current situation (Crowley was pro-B-item, saying that the directive can be fixed in the second reading), and about the badness of the Council's text (Crowley said that 50% of the first reading amendments were kept, so our position wasn't discarded). (Since Crowley is (a substitute) on the JURI committee, he may be seen as an expert on this directive, so he may be having an unexpected influence on the other MEPs. I'll have to try to meet him again.) She didn't like the issue being painted as big business Vs. small, but without using those words, I told her that the situation is just like that. I left with her a copy of three of our letters, but it struck me that really we should have a comprehensive positional paper on the directive. I will make a skeleton draft this evening and will circulate it. She mentioned that she'd heard TRIPS requires software patents. Here's the follow up mail I sent her (I've trimmed the "thanks for the meeting", here's our contact details, etc bits) > One quick follow up point I'd like to make is about TRIPS. Article 10 says: > > "Computer programs, whether in source or object code, shall be protected > as literary works under the Berne Convention." > > As literary works, not as a field of technology - therefore not covered by > Article 27 which says: > > "patents shall be available for any inventions in all field of technology, > provided they are capable [...] of industrial application" > > Article 10 could even be interpreted as saying that allowing software > patents would actually violate TRIPS - because patents deny authors of the > copyrights granted to them by the Berne Convention (my copyrights are > useless if someone else makes a patent claim to my work). But we don't have > to go that far to see that it is false to claim that TRIPS requires software > patents. -- Ciarán O'Riordan, http://www.compsoc.com/~coriordan/ Have you signed up to help FSF Europe yet? http://www.fsfe.org/

3 3

IFSO Postal address
by Glenn Strong 31 Mar '05

31 Mar '05

Greetings, Letter post for IFSO should be sent to PO Box 10105 Dublin 2 (sidebar - if the post is urgent you would be well advised to pop a quick email to contact(a)ifso.ie to ensure the box is checked in a timely manner; we do not get notified when post arrives there). Thank you. -- Glenn Strong

1 0

Re: [Fsfe-ie] Met MEP Mairead McGuinness
by Malcolm Tyrrell 31 Mar '05

31 Mar '05

> there are many reasonable people who would consider > software a field of technology. I would say that there are few reasonable people who would consider that software is not a field of technology. This directly related to one of the problems of the current wording of the directive. Requiring software to have a "technical effect" for it to be patentable, is, in my opinion, requiring software to be software. Malcohol. _________________________________________________________________ Sign up for eircom broadband now and get a free two month trial.* Phone 1850 73 00 73 or visit http://home.eircom.net/broadbandoffer

1 0

IFSO Wiki updates
by IfsoWiki＠ifso.ie 31 Mar '05

31 Mar '05

* DavidCathcart IfsoWebPagesThu, 31 Mar 2005 07:30:01 -0000 create page for ifso in the press URL: http://www.ifso.ie/cgi-bin/wiki.cgi/IfsoWebPages * DavidCathcart TemporaryNewDocsThu, 31 Mar 2005 07:30:01 -0000 URL: http://www.ifso.ie/cgi-bin/wiki.cgi/TemporaryNewDocs * DavidCathcart IfsoInThePressThu, 31 Mar 2005 07:30:01 -0000 URL: http://www.ifso.ie/cgi-bin/wiki.cgi/IfsoInThePress * GlennStrong IfsoProjectsThu, 31 Mar 2005 07:30:01 -0000 URL: http://www.ifso.ie/cgi-bin/wiki.cgi/IfsoProjects * GlennStrong IfsoPromoThu, 31 Mar 2005 07:30:01 -0000 URL: http://www.ifso.ie/cgi-bin/wiki.cgi/IfsoPromo * GlennStrong IfsoPromo/AboutIfsoThu, 31 Mar 2005 07:30:01 -0000 URL: http://www.ifso.ie/cgi-bin/wiki.cgi/IfsoPromo_2fAboutIfso

1 0

Auf wiedersehen, Herr Mueller
by Teresa Hackett 30 Mar '05

30 Mar '05

Let's hope that FFII will not create distractions from the main issues. PRESS RELEASE FFII -- [ Europe / economy / ICT ] ======================================================================= EU SOFTWARE PATENT CRITICS UNITED: NOSOFTWAREPATENTS.COM BECOMES AN FFII PLATFORM ======================================================================= Munich (30 March 2005). In advance of the European Parliament's second reading on a software patent directive, the resistance movement against software patents in the EU regroups. Today it was announced that the FFII (Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure), the leading organization that opposes software patents in Europe, will take over the NoSoftwarePatents.com campaign. Through content in 17 languages, NoSoftwarePatents.com addresses a pan-European audience and delivers easy-to-understand information on the controversial topic. The campaign was brought to life last year by software industry veteran Florian Mueller with the help of three sponsors: 1&1 (a German company that is the world's largest Web host), Red Hat, and MySQL AB. NoSoftwarePatents.com quickly became known for not mincing words in its criticism of companies and organizations that lobby for software patents. "NoSoftwarePatents.com is by far the best introductory Web site on the subject of computing idea monopolies to date", said Hartmut Pilch, president of the FFII. "Florian Mueller has contributed an important missing link between various communities. Together with 1&1, Red Hat and MySQL, our media team will now leverage the NoSoftwarePatents.com platform to further boost the morale of the large majority of companies and individuals whose freedom and productivity is currently under threat." The NoSoftwarePatents sponsors approved the transfer of the NoSoftwarePatents.com site to the FFII, and will work with the FFII in a similar way as they previously did with NoSoftwarePatents.com while it was an independent campaign. "MySQL AB believes in copyright law as the proper mechanism for protecting the rights of software authors, and we consider software patents harmful to the industry at large", said Marten Mickos, CEO of Swedish database company MySQL AB. "Together with 1&1 and Red Hat, we funded the creation of the NoSoftwarePatents.com platform, and prior to that we had already been supporting Florian's political work for several months. NoSoftwarePatents.com has had an enormous impact, and we are excited to be working closely with the FFII." Florian Mueller, the founder of NoSoftwarePatents.com, believes that the take-over of NoSoftwarePatents.com "will further cement the FFII's leadership role". He pointed out that his biography on the campaign site had been stating all along that he "temporarily interrupted his own software development project" in order to campaign against software patents. According to Mr. Mueller, the time had come for him "after a fantastic year in politics" to resume his own project (a computer game), but he said he will still be involved in the fight against software patents from time to time. ======================================================================= Current Status of the EU Software Patent Directive ======================================================================= On 7 March, the EU Council, commonly referred to as the "Council of Ministers" because it is comprised of ministers from the member countries of the union, claimed to have adopted a "common position" on software patents. The decision was taken on the basis of minority support, against strong resistance by various national parliaments and despite a request by the European Parliament to restart the entire process on the controversial directive. Whether and how the "uncommon position" was adopted is still unclear. 23 questions by the FFII http://wiki.ffii.org/LtrFfiiCons050308En remain unanswered. A long list of countries, among them six that had originally supported the proposal, added unilateral declarations by which they distanced themselves from the decision and suggested substantial amendments in the further process. The Council's proposal is now on its way to the European Parliament, which is widely expected to begin a second reading in mid April and to vote on possible amendments, or rejection, in early July. In order to take any such decision, the EP now needs a majority of its component members, which represents a minimum number of 367 votes irrespective of absences and abstentions. If the EP amends the proposal, then it goes back to the EU Council and then on to a possible conciliation proceeding, which in turn might be followed by parallel third readings in both institutions. On tuesday morning, the FFII distributed a letter with appendices http://wiki.ffii.org/Plen05En to all members of the European Parliament in which it asks for either full restoration of its position of September 2003, which effectively excluded software patents, or rejection of the directive. ======================================================================= About the FFII (Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure, www.ffii.org) ======================================================================= The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII) is a non-profit association registered in several European countries, which is dedicated to the spread of data processing literacy. The FFII supports the development of public information goods based on copyright, free competition, open standards. More than 500 members, 1,400 companies and 80,000 supporters have entrusted the FFII to act as their voice in public policy questions concerning exclusion rights (intellectual property) in data processing. The FFII maintains offices in Brussels and Munich. ======================================================================= About the NoSoftwarePatents.com Campaign ======================================================================= The NoSoftwarePatents.com campaign was launched on October 20th and is supported by three IT companies (1&1, Red Hat, and MySQL AB). The views expressed by the campaign are those of the campaign manager and not necessarily those of the aforementioned companies. Through Web content in 17 languages, the campaign addresses a pan-European audience. More information on the campaign is available on its Website. ======================================================================= Contact Information ======================================================================= For further information concerning this announcement or the NoSoftwarePatents.com campaign, please contact: Florian Mueller Campaign Manager, NoSoftwarePatents.com telephone +49 (8151) 651850 press(a)nosoftwarepatents.com Hartmut Pilch President of FFII, Munich Office telephone +49 (89) 18979927 phm(a)ffii.org Erik Josefsson Brussels Representative of FFII telephone +32 27396260 erjos(a)ffii.org _______________________________________________ FFII Press Releases. (un)subscribe via http://lists.ffii.org/mailman/listinfo/news, or contact media(a)ffii.org for more information. ENG: "Corporations are not democratic institutions --their directors and managers owe no accountability to anyone but the shareholders that employ them." ----------------------------------------------------------------- ESP: "Las corporaciones (empresas) no son instituciones democráticas: a sus directores y gerentes no se les puede fincar responsabilidades ante nadie excepto ante sus accionistas que les emplean." -- Bakan, Joel. (2004). The Corporation. The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power : La corporación (empresa). La búsqueda patológica de ganancias y poder. London: Constable & Robinson, p. 151 __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ _______________________________________________ Upd-discuss mailing list Upd-discuss(a)lists.essential.org http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/upd-discuss

1 0

Some documents on the wiki
by Glenn Strong 30 Mar '05

30 Mar '05

Hi folks, We're working up some documents for promotion and press packs, etc. First up is an "About IFSO" blurb for press releases and the like, by Ciaran. We'll be using the wiki for most of this stuff, so please edit away if you see something that needs correcting. http://www.ifso.ie/cgi-bin/wiki.cgi/IfsoPromo_2fAboutIfso -- Glenn Strong

1 0

FFII strategy on MEP lobbying
by Malcolm Tyrrell 30 Mar '05

30 Mar '05

"FFII asks MEPs to either fully amend or reject software patents directive" http://wiki.ffii.org/LtrFfiiMeps050329En Malcohol. _________________________________________________________________ Sign up for eircom broadband now and get a free two month trial.* Phone 1850 73 00 73 or visit http://home.eircom.net/broadbandoffer

1 0

India reverses policy on software patents
by Teresa Hackett 29 Mar '05

29 Mar '05

Software patents under Ordinance face reversal FINANCIAL EXPRESS OF INDIA http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=86454 by K G NARENDRANATH Posted online: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 at 0025 hours IST NEW DELHI, MARCH 28: The Patent Office is likely to reverse the patents granted to embedded software during the period the Ordinance was in force. While the Patents Ordinance had allowed such patenting, the Amendment Bill passed in Parliament last week had dropped the clause that allowed patenting of software-related inventions. Since December 27, 2004, when the Ordinance was promulgated, letters have been issued to many claimants of software-related patents, asking them to establish the compliance with the technical requirements for patenting. When contacted, Controller General of Patents and Trademarks S Chandrasekharan told FE that patenting process for software-related inventions initiated after December Ordinance would now be reversed. He was, however, non-committal when asked whether the patents granted prior to the Ordinance would also be revoked. Multinational electronics companies such as LG, Nokia, Siemens, Philips and Samsung had obtained a spate of Indian patents on sundry mechanical applications of software. According to sources, over 150 patents on 'technical effects of software' had been granted in the country even prior to the December Ordinance. These patents were granted despite the legal ambiguity that had prevailed prior to issuance of the Ordinance. The Patent Office had interpreted the law leniently in favour of patent seekers. Not only that, as soon as the Ordinance clarified that software could be patented if embedded with hardware, the Patent Office had begun the patenting process afresh for a large number of such inventions. Patents granted to software-enabled inventions include video imaging systems in mobile telephone handsets, data transmission systems as well as methods for controlling speeds of devices. Legal experts point out that software-related patents already granted could be successfully challenged in courts, given the clarification of the law in the recent amendment. Many countries give patents to software-enabled technical effects, while some like the US allow even patenting of software per se. A large section of the Indian IT software and services industry has been pitching for patenting of software embedded with hardware arguing it would help increase commercial value of domestically developed software and augment exports. The counter argument is software processes are just mathematic algorithms that do not qualify as inventions. Left parties had claimed that only foreign MNCs would benefit from software patents. The Patent Office is planning to start a project for comprehensive search of non-patent literature on inventions. Currently, while prior art information regarding patent applications and grants is available under the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) mechanism, there is a huge shortcoming about accessing non-patent literature.

1 0

Brazil: Free Software's Biggest and Best Friend
by Teresa Hackett 29 Mar '05

29 Mar '05

Brazil: Free Software's Biggest and Best Friend By TODD BENSON <http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?ppds=bylL&v1=TODD BENSON&fdq=19960101&td=sysdate&sort=newest&ac=TODD BENSON&inline=nyt-per> New York Times March 29, 2005 S<http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/dropcap/s.gif> ÃO PAULO, Brazil, March 28 - Since taking office two years ago, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has turned Brazil into a tropical outpost of the free software movement. Looking to save millions of dollars in royalties and licensing fees, Mr. da Silva has instructed government ministries and state-run companies to gradually switch from costly operating systems made by Microsoft and others to free operating systems, like Linux. On Mr. da Silva's watch, Brazil has also become the first country to require any company or research institute that receives government financing to develop software to license it as open-source, meaning the underlying software code must be free to all. Now Brazil's government looks poised to take its free software campaign to the masses. And once again Microsoft may end up on the sidelines. By the end of April, the government plans to roll out a much ballyhooed program called PC Conectado, or Connected PC, aimed at helping millions of low-income Brazilians buy their first computers. And if the president's top technology adviser gets his way, the program may end up offering computers with only free software, including the operating system, handpicked by the government instead of giving consumers the option of paying more for, say, a basic edition of Microsoft Windows. "For this program to be viable, it has to be with free software," said Sérgio Amadeu, president of Brazil's National Institute of Information Technology, the agency that oversees the government's technology initiatives. "We're not going to spend taxpayers' money on a program so that Microsoft can further consolidate its monopoly. It's the government's responsibility to ensure that there is competition, and that means giving alternative software platforms a chance to prosper." Microsoft has offered to provide a simplified, discounted version of Windows for the program. Though a final decision on which software to install has been delayed several times, as has the program's rollout, Mr. Amadeu and some other government officials have publicly criticized Microsoft's proposal, calling the version's abilities too limited. Still, Microsoft has not given up just yet. The company, which declined to make an executive available for an interview, said in a statement that it was still "working with the PC Conectado project to see if there's a way Microsoft can help." Under the program, which is expected to offer tax incentives for computer makers to cut prices and a generous payment plan for consumers, the government hopes to offer desktops for around 1,400 reais ($509) or less. The machines will be comparable to those costing almost twice that outside the program. Buyers will be able to pay in 24 installments of 50 to 60 reais, or about $18 to $21.80 a month, an amount affordable for many working poor. The country's top three fixed-line telephone companies - Telefónica of Spain; Tele Norte Leste Participações, or Telemar; and Brasil Telecom - have agreed to provide a dial-up Internet connection to participants for 7.50 reais, or less than $3, a month, allowing 15 hours of Web surfing. The program aims at households and small-business owners earning three to seven times the minimum monthly wage, or about $284 to $662. The government says seven million qualify, and it hopes to reach a million of them by year-end. That may seem ambitious in a developing country of 183 million people where only 10 percent of all households have Internet access and just 900,000 computers are sold legally each year. (Including black-market sales, the number is closer to four million, still a small fraction of the number sold in the United States last year, according to the International Data Corporation, a technology research firm.) "We're well aware that we're talking about doubling the domestic market for personal computers," said Cezar Alvarez, the presidential aide in charge of the PC Conectado program. "But it's absolutely feasible." Some analysts have questioned the effectiveness of such programs, noting that some similar projects in Asia have become bogged down in red tape and, in some cases, have ended up favoring the elite. In Malaysia, for instance, the government is introducing a second affordable-computer program after its first attempt failed because of poor planning and fraud - something Brazilian officials say they are working hard to prevent. Others say the government should focus its technology initiatives elsewhere, especially in schools. Only 19 percent of Brazil's public schools have computers. The government says it plans to complement the PC Conectado program with stepped-up efforts to put more computers into schools. It is also investing $74 million to open 1,000 community centers in poor neighborhoods by year-end with computers that run free software programs and offer free Internet access - supplementing similar programs by local governments and nongovernmental organizations. The drive to bridge the digital divide has drawn widespread praise throughout the technology industry. But the preference for open-source software has been controversial, with critics inside and outside the government saying Mr. da Silva's administration is letting leftist ideology trump the laws of supply and demand. "The government shouldn't be the one who decides what hardware and software will go into these computers," said Júlio Semeghini, a member of Congress from the opposition Social Democratic Party. "That's undemocratic." The open-source route, however, has support beyond the da Silva administration. Walter Bender, the executive director of the Media Lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, whose opinion was solicited by the Brazilian government, replied in a recent letter that "high-quality free software" has proved more effective in stimulating computer use among the poor than scaled-down versions of proprietary software. Though he said he did not oppose giving consumers a choice, he concluded that "free software provides a basis for more widespread access, more powerful uses and a much stronger platform for long-term growth and development." Whatever the government decides, most industry analysts agree that the program will probably help combat software piracy, which is widespread in Brazil. And by wooing new consumers, "even if the program doesn't reach its goals, it's going to end up stimulating the computer and software markets," said Jorge Sukarie, president of the Brazilian Association of Software Companies. "It's not perfect, but it's certainly better than nothing."

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

FSFE-IE March 2005