[ILUG] Irish Software Association - Another Microsoft Shill?

[Niall Walsh]

John McCormac wrote:

> Justin Mason wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> John McCormac writes:
>>
>>> Interesting that the incoming chairwoman (Bernie Cullinane of 
>>> performix apparently) of the Irish software association is backing 
>>> EU Software Patents according to the Irish Times. Looks like 
>>> Microsoft bought another "industry association".
>>
> important quotes from the article:
>
> 'The incoming chairwoman of the Irish Software Association (ISA), 
> Bernie Cullinane, has pledged to support the introduction of a 
> proposed European Union directive on software patents.'
>
> I wonder if any members of the ISA actually support this shill activity?

Well I support the introduction of a proposed European Union directive 
on software patents also, I think I'd have been happy to go with the 
text of the EU Parliment and I expect that they will again ensure 
(despite the extra barrier) that a good directive goes through.   Of 
course I am not an ISA member.   You can see the list 
http://www.software.ie/Sectors/ISA/ISADoclib3.nsf/wvMembers?OpenView 
though I don't notice many names which would clearly not support this 
stance?   They also don't list a price to join :-(

> 'She also warned members of the European parliament against blocking 
> the controversial new directive or weakening it by proposing a host of 
> amendments.'
>
> Shades of the Skibereen Eagle eh?

Not a host of amendments, just a few :-)   
http://www.europarl.eu.int/meetdocs/2004_2009/documents/DT/563/563744/563744en.pdf 
provides the framework (I think) for the EU Parliment to discuss this.   
My favourite quote (I think, I like a lot):

"Software is in fact the combination in an original work of one or more 
algorithms, that is to say, a set of mathematical formulae. As Albert 
Einstein has said, a mathematical formula is not patentable. It is by 
nature an idea, like a book, a set of words, or a chord in music."

Everyone agrees clarity is required and I certainly don't want to see it 
weakened, I want it strengthened to make it absolutely clear that 
software cannot be patented.   I would like to see a simple amendment 
such as "software cannot infringe a patent" or perhaps even better would 
be "any copyrighted work cannot be patented or infringe upon one".   
What is the problem?   Now if you build a system which requires a 
computer but does something which is patentable you can go ahead, but no 
other software writers have to pay any attention to your work though a 
system implementor or hardware manufacturer might (though they also know 
the software is clean).

> 'Ms Cullinane, a former chief operating officer of the Irish company 
> Performix said European firms needed to protect their intellectual 
> property in a similar manner to the way US firms can.'
>
> Frivolous and fradulent patents. Obviously someone well versed in the 
> art.

http://www.bsa.org/usa/policy/loader.cfm?url=/commonspot/security/getfile.cfm&pageid=23401&hitboxdone=yes

That's the US system which even the BSA wants to reform because it 
doesn't handle software well?

> ' "We don't want any further dilution of the current situation on 
> patents," she said in an interview with The Irish Times following her 
> ratification as chairwoman of the ISA last night. '
>
> Software expertise or legal expertise - who the hell can tell with 
> these has-beens and never-weres? The only clear thing is that they are 
> shills.

No dilution of the current situation is a nice a clear phrase!  What 
current situation?   The one where various patent offices have taken it 
upon themselves to decide just what "software is not patentable" means 
and therefore we have inconsistent interpretations of questionable legal 
standing underpinning/mining software in Europe?

> Regards...jmcc

Niall