Trivial patents *not the problem* (was: Re: [ILUG] Re: ILUG sends s/w patents briefing document to Irish MEPs)

[Paul Jakma]

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:

> http://ifso.ie/documents/swpats-meps-00.html
> "By impeding the growth of successful small companies, competition and
>  employment will be hurt, and many innovative products won't reach the
>  market."
>
> http://ifso.ie/documents/swpats-council-00.html
> "On the provider side, F/OSS creates new opportunities for software and
>  service providers, which may be a unique opportunity for the European
>  software industry - somehow this may be a proverbial ''second and last
>  chance''"
>
> http://ifso.ie/documents/juriletter1.pdf
> "The directive would have drastic consequences for Europe's indigenous
>  software industry"
>
>
> ...or if you mean I'm ignoring it in this thread, that's because this thread
> was about the harm of trivial patents, and I pointed out that this was not
> the problem with software patents.

Notice that all these arguments above are focused solely on the 
balance of economic impact. Which will be the only real way to sway 
the politicians.

This is exactly the point Colm made to you in another email. 
Idealogical "Software is different!!" argument is simply academic, 
(indeed, it's an inconsistent position, Colm's arguments in the past 
have persuaded me of this).

> How can one argue against software patents without arguing against the
> entire patent system without claiming that software is different?

That's the problem in a nutshell :)

Software isn't really different, that's the problem. So trying to 
argue such isn't going to have much point, least not in the 
short/medium term.

Argue based on pragmatic points.

If your ideology doesn't allow this, it's possibly time to reexamine 
whether its worth much. (NB: long term pragmatism sometimes 
contradicts short-term convenience).

> They voted for software patentability, but I believe it was out of 
> lack of information, coercion, and wording trickery by the drafters 
> of the council amendments.

I don't think so, but anyway. I think they're reasonably well 
informed. The commision's proposal even mentions Free Software 
several times - they certainly know about, they just concluded that 
on balance it would be better to have (limited) software patents.

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma	paul at clubi.ie	paul at jakma.org	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
The sight of death frightens them [Earthers].
 		-- Kras the Klingon, "Friday's Child", stardate 3497.2