[DMCA-Activists] EU Software Patent Proposal Protested

[Seth Johnson]

> http://dbs.cordis.lu/cgi-bin/srchidadb?CALLER=NHP_EN_NEWS&ACTION=D&SESSION=&RCN=EN_RCN_ID:20801&TBL=EN_NEWS


Draft legislation on patenting computerised inventions will stifle
innovation, claim protestors

[Date: 2003-08-28]

On 27 August, proponents of a 'free Europe without software patents'
gathered outside the European Parliament to protest against a Commission
proposal on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions. 

The proposal, which will be submitted to European Parliament for plenary
debate and a subsequent decision on 1 September, was initially drawn up with
a view to eliminating ambiguity in the way software-related patents are
handled, and differences in the way EU Member States interpret individual
patents. 

Since then the proposal has passed through three different Parliamentary
committees, where MEPS have made amendments with the aim of better defining
the type of inventions to be covered by the directive. In particular, the
term 'computer-implemented inventions' has been amended so that it does not
cover computer software programs as such, but only devices such as mobile
phones, intelligent household appliances, engine control devices, machine
tools and computer program related inventions. 

However, those opposing the proposal believe that the amendments do not go
far enough and describe the proposed directive as a 'wolf in a sheep's
coat'. One of the protestors at the rally, Peter Gerwinski from the Germany
based foundation for a free information Infrastructure (FFII) told CORDIS
News that the Commission proposal's is deceptive. 'Those that have drawn up
the proposal are trying to give the impression that they are forbidding
software patents, while in fact they are introducing them.' 

Dr Gerwinski referred to the first draft of the proposal, which defined the
term 'computer-implemented inventions' as 'any invention, the performance of
which involves the use of a computer, computer network or other programmable
apparatus and having one or more prima facie novel features which are
realised wholly or partly by means of a computer program or computer
programs.' 

'The current draft of the proposal has been amended so the above reference
is very well hidden, but the message is the same: Software is patentable,'
he argued. 

Dr Gerwinski is a software developer by profession and runs a software
development company in Germany. He strongly believes that the Commission
proposal will have dire effects upon innovation and the future of small
software companies. 'When patenting of software is introduced in Europe as
it is in the US, which is planned in the long run, I will be forced to close
down my business and go and work for one of the big players,' speculated Dr
Gerwinski. 

Despite the existing EU directive (91/250/EEC), which excludes software from
patentability rules, a total of 30, 000 software patents have already been
granted by the European Patent Office (EPO). 'The existing patents are
enough to forbid every software I write,' said Dr Gerwinski. 'Very basic
techniques like the progress bar have already been patented, meaning that
small companies are being squeezed out, leaving bigger companies to
monopolise the market'. 

However, according to MEP Arlene McCarthy from the Parliament's legal
affairs committee, the draft legislative resolution takes into account
concerns regarding the potential impact on small businesses. One amendment
in the draft legislation calls on the Commission to monitor the impact of
the legislation on small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). 

During the rally, web administrators opposing the draft legislation
demonstrated the potential consequences of software patentability by
temporarily blocking access to their websites. 'We wanted to show what would
happen if a patent owner forbids the use of a specific piece of software -
all websites connected to that software would go down,' explained Dr
Gerwinski. 

More than 150,000 people have expressed doubts about the proposal and have
signed a petition in support of 'a free Europe without software patents'.
Among the supporters are some 2,000 company owners and chief executives,
2,500 developers and engineers from all sectors of the European information
and telecommunication industries, as well as more than 2,000 scientists and
180 lawyers. They claim that patents and software do not go together and
that copyright is the best solution for protecting the work of those that
write software. 

'Patenting software is like patenting an onion and then forbidding its use
in recipes,' explained Tinne Van Der Straeten, an activist from the Belgian
group, the Young Greens. 

Dr Gerwinski agreed that this illustrates well the illogical nature of the
current proposal's objective. His organisation is calling on MEPs to examine
the proposed legislation more closely and then read the FFII's comments
before casting their vote on 1 September.

For further information about the draft legislation, please click here:
http://www2.europarl.eu.int/omk/sipade2?L=EN&OBJID=30318&LEVEL=3&MODE=SIP&NAV=X&LSTDOC=N


Category: General policy
Data Source Provider: CORDIS News interviews with software patenting
objectors
Document Reference: Based on CORDIS News interviews with software patenting
objectors
Subject Index : Information Processing, Information Systems; Legislation,
Regulations

-- 

DRM is Theft!  We are the Stakeholders!

New Yorkers for Fair Use
http://www.nyfairuse.org

[CC] Counter-copyright: http://www.boson2x.org/article.php3?id_article=21

I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or distribution of
this incidentally recorded communication.  Original authorship should be
attributed reasonably, but only so far as such an expectation might hold for
usual practice in ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim of
exclusive rights.