Discussion March 2003

discussion@lists.fsfe.org

35 participants
26 discussions

Patents
by Onno Timmerman 24 Mar '03

24 Mar '03

Hello, What is the state of the current draft for software patents. You see I'm not a law. but am in a flux to make changes to the current draft. They need to be in Dutch and I will hand them over to Kathleen Van Brempt sp.a EU parl. She will give in any proposal I make. For that to do I need to know how bad the current draft is with all the changes. (Saying simple NO to software patents won't do) Thanxs Onno Timmerman sp.a

1 0

Re: Tarun from Nepal - logiciels libres dans prise de position SMSI
by Chantal Peyer 24 Mar '03

24 Mar '03

Chère Claude, Juste un petite précision d'abord: je ne suis pas "member of the executive committee for WSIS".. Ou alors qu'entends-tu par-là? Je suis simplement représentante de Pain pour le prochain (et des ONG Nors-Sud membres de la communauté de travail) au sein de la délégation officielle suisse.... Pour les logiciels libres. Jai relu ce week-end les déclarations de la société civile lors de la prepcopm2, et je pense que les deux textes (déclarations et plan d'action) contiennent des revendications importantes sur la question des logiciels libres. Voir http://www.worldsummit2003.de/ (section: Zweite WSIS Vorbereitungskonferenz PrepCom2 Worldsummit2003.de berichtete; puis Zivilgesellschaft: Thematische Arbeitsgruppen und Stellungnahmen, puis ting Group for the Common Statements of Civil Society) pour trouver ces documents. Quelques exemples des demandes de la société civile pour le plan d'action: ð Authors must be encouraged to retain ownership of their copyrights and not to automatically transfer copyrights to publishers or other intermediaries. ð Non-commercial use and private copy of digital contents should be regarded and protected as fair use. ð Computer software has different characteristics from other creative works in that it is functional/technical works and has no meaning as a public domain after the protection period. So, computer software should not be protected by copyright, or at least, the protection period of computer software should be shortened. ð Open Source/Free Software shall be adopted by all public authorities and bodies. ð Developing countries should investigate how to leverage the opportunities presented by the emergence of Open Source/Free software in the context of limited financial resources and expertise. ð Change current intellectual property regimes so that all information and knowledge produced with the aid of public resources, for example the outputs of publicly funded educational and research institutions, are automatically released as open content and made available and accessible at no cost into the public domain. ð Software shall not be patentable, in principle. ð Business model (or method) patent should not be allowed. ð A first-to-invent instead a first-to-file patent application rule shall be adopted, in order to better preserve the rights of academic scientists and low-income inventors. ð The purpose of patent is to develop technology and thus to promote the quality of life such as health, etc. In line with it, national policy to limit patent holders right for public health such as compulsory licensing and parallel importation should be allowed without interference of other countries as addressed in the declaration on TRIPS agreement and public health adopted in Doha WTO ministerial conference. Il faut à mon avis s'en inspirer pour des demandes suisses. Chantal ----- Original Message ----- From: "Claude Almansi" <claude.almansi(a)bluewin.ch> To: "Chantal Peyer" <peyer(a)bfa-ppp.ch>; "Michel Egger" <megger(a)swisscoalition.ch>; "Marie Thorndahl" <marie(a)mondes.info> Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 10:51 AM Subject: TR : Tarun from Nepal - logiciels libres dans prise de position SMSI Chers Amis J'ai connu Tarun à la réunion UNESCO à Lugano. C'est en partie son journal www.spacetimeonline.com qui m'a poussée à demander que les suisses présents cessent de parler de "pays moins avancés" en matière de TIC pour des pays moins avantagés, mais qui ont les idées beaucoup plus claires que nous dans ce domaine. Je crois que sa réaction, pour brève qu'elle soit est symptomatique de l'importance des logiciels libres pour les pays du sud. Je n'écris pas à toute la liste comunica-ch à dessein Pas que je veuille cacher la chose à Modoux - mais je ne veux pas non plus le mettre dans une position embarassante. A mardi Claude -----Message d'origine----- De : tarun poudel [mailto:tarunpoudel@hotmail.com] Envoyé : samedi 22 mars 2003 09:24 À : claude.almansi(a)bluewin.ch Objet : Re: Tarun from Nepal Dear Claude Almansi Greeting from Nepal Thanks for rememberance. I arrived Nepal on 20 March evening. I fully support your point.We can go together. Tarun K Poudel Secretary General Nepal Press Union >From: "Claude Almansi" <claude.almansi(a)bluewin.ch> >To: "Tarun Poudel" <tarunpoudel(a)hotmail.com>,"Martin Musunka" ><M_musunka(a)yahoo.com> >Subject: TR : [wilhelmtux-discussion] Re: World Summit on the Information >Society >Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 18:51:47 +0100 > >Dear Tarun and Martin, > >I hope you both have arrived safely back at home and aren't too tired. > >I thought you might both be interested by this forward. Chantal is both >among the managers of the Swiss Civil Society platform for SWIS >(www.comunica-ch.net ), and member of the executive committee for WSIS. >Sascha I first corresponded with through Wilhelm Tux, our >pro-open-software association. I think now Wilhelm Tux has joined the >civil society platform - at least Sacha Brawer and Alex Schröder have. > >Now if the governments - the core of WSIS, as Alain Modoux said on >Sunday - are really going to reinforce this line, i.e. no mention of >opensource software and an accrued insistance on "security" (as a means >to curtail rights and liberties), my guess is that Civil Society might >consider seriously the possibility of a counter summit. Some >organisations were already pushing in this direction at the PrepCom2 in >february. It would be a pity, because it would be better to be heard at >the official summit, even at a side event. But not to be reduced to >alibi. > >Cheers > >Claude > >-----Message d'origine----- >De : wilhelmtux-discussion-bounces(a)wilhelmtux.ch >[mailto:wilhelmtux-discussion-bounces@wilhelmtux.ch] De la part de >Chantal Peyer Envoyé : mardi 18 mars 2003 15:03 >À : Sascha Brawer; discussion(a)fsfeurope.org; Wilhelm Tux; gnu(a)gnu.org; >team(a)fsfeurope.org >Cc : Loic Dachary >Objet : [wilhelmtux-discussion] Re: World Summit on the Information >Society > > >Hello, > >An interesting article for you, I believe: >http://www.worldsummit2003.de/en/web/237.htm > >Chantal Peyer > >Geneva, 26 February 2003. The government delegations are currently >working on the summit action plan, after they have debated the "vision" >and "key principles" sections of the draft declaration. The latest >version of the draft was scheduled to be out yesterday evening, but >only came out to the public this morning. Civil society groups are >working everywhere to produce comments and amendmends. The drafting >group of civil society's "content and themes" committee is putting them >together as a common input for the sessions of PrepCom subcommittee 2. >There are a number of issues that are not welcome by many groups. For >example, all mentions of "open source" and "free software" have been >deleted completely in the current draft. "Security", which became a big >theme in the recent months due to the US-led "war against terrorism" >has got a whole section now, arguing for the need to "prevent the use >of information resources or technologies for criminal or terrorist >purposes". Civil society groups fear that this language would be used >to legitimise new suveillance powers and weaken civil liberties. The >European Union today circulated a "List of Issues" paper for the >declaration themes and the action plan, which was mostly welcomed by >Civil Society. But it is still unclear if the EU will use its >international weight to really push this in the negotiations. The Greek >presidency seems to be very calm, and the other EU government >delegations leave it up to them to speak out publicly. These conflicts >will continue in the coming months. Today it became clear that PrepCom2 >will not produce any final version of the draft summit declaration. >With only one and a half days left for negotiations, time is running >out. Today we heard that the outcome of PrepCom2 will probably only get >the status of a "rough draft". This working document will further be >discussed in an "intersessional process" before PrepCom3 in September. >It is still not clear if this will be an open process with >participation of all stakeholders, or if the government delegations >will meet behind closed doors only. But even if the intersessional >process is open, it creates heavy problems for the real participation >of many disadvantaged actors. The poorest countries which do not have >permanent missions to the United Nations in Geneva might not have the >ressources to attend all these meetings, and the high costs for >traveling and staying in this expensive city will prevent a lot of >civil society groups from participating, too. > >The lack of openness and inclusion of all stakeholders again led to >sharp criticism in the open session of subcommittee 2 this morning. The >private sector delegates were really annoyed by the exclusion, and the >international organisations and civil society speakers voiced their >critique along the same lines. The president of the PrepCom, Adama >Samassekou, was quite impressed by these complaints. He invited the >heads of the government delegations to a special discussion on >multi-stakeholder participation and involvement. We have not heard any >outcomes yet, but we will closely follow the further progress of these >debates. > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Sascha Brawer" <brawer(a)acm.org> >To: <discussion(a)fsfeurope.org>; "Wilhelm Tux" ><wilhelmtux-discussion(a)wilhelmtux.ch>; <gnu(a)gnu.org>; ><team(a)fsfeurope.org> >Cc: "Loic Dachary" <loic(a)gnu.org>; "Chantal Peyer" <peyer(a)bfa-ppp.ch> >Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 4:09 AM >Subject: World Summit on the Information Society > > >Hi all > >It seems that the Free Software movement has well-informed allies in >rather unexpected areas. At least to me, it was news that traditional >development-collaboration organizations are concerned about Information >Technology, to an extent that they are discussing software patents with >the Patent Office. So, please let me describe an experience before I >ask a few questions. > >Today, a number of Swiss non-governmental organizations met in Berne to >discuss WSIS, the United Nations World Summit on the Information >Society [1] whose first part will take place in Geneva in December >2003. Most of the audience was rather remote from computing: Besides >Alex Schröder and myself, who were both representing Wilhelm Tux [2], >probably pretty much everyone else was from a media, development, >women's, human rights, ... organization. Correspondingly, a big part of >the discussion was about topics like the digital divide, community >radios, or oppression of journalists -- all very important, but not >immediately related to Free Software. > >However, the official position paper ('platform') of the Swiss NGOs [3] >does include short statements about Free Software and Intellectual >Property rights. The symposium brochure contains several paragraphs >about these topics. Actually, the organizers turned out to be quite >familiar with the goals of our movement. For example, Chantal Peyer of >'Bread for All' [4], who co-organized the symposium, has read the GNU >philosophy pages and is well aware of the discussion around software >patents. Chantal told me that their position on the patent system >actually is one of the areas where they got into a debate with the >Swiss administration, so they had discussions with a representative >from the patent office. > >I was quite surprised and delighted to hear this, of course. In my >humble opinion, the least we as proponents of Free Software should do >is to become more visible to these supporters of our goals. While I >personally doubt that big-scale events like WSIS can have very concrete >effects, the world summit in December might be a good opportunity for >getting publicity and more supporters. So, I'd like to ask a few >things: > >* Does the FSF have any plans with regards to the WSIS summit in >Geneva? I've found a few postings on the Web containing both 'WSIS' and >('GNU' or 'FSF'), but nothing too concrete. The official list of WSIS >participants does not seem to include FSF. > >* Are people at FSF Europe aware of WSIS? Did the country chapters >establish any contacts to the respective preparation groups in their >area? Maybe other groups will be surprised, too, to hear about >unexpected supporters of Free Software. > >* Would it make sense to have more texts catering to NGOs, for instance >explaining why Free Software is good for developing countries? > >* Another area where NGOs might become our ally is encryption: Why is >it that the likes of Amnesty International, Greenpeace etc. are not >loud voices in the discussion about outlawing cryptographic technology? >After all, one would presume that these people had an interest in >crypto being legal. > >* Wilhelm Tux could officially sign the Swiss NGO position paper [3]. > >Personally, I wouldn't mind going to some preparatory meetings, >explaining the Free Software movement to NGO people, etc., but I'm sure >there are people around who are better suited for this. > >I'd be sorry if all this was old news to everyone but me. I did try to >find information about FSF's participation at WSIS on the Web, but I >had no real success. I think it would be quite awkward if such a >big-scale event about the "Information Society," which also is a chance >to meet many potential supporters, was without the presence of one of >the most important groups. > >Best regards > >-- Sascha Brawer, brawer(a)acm.org [5] > Berne, Switzerland > >[1] http://www.itu.int/wsis/ >[2] Swiss Campaign for Free Software, http://wilhelmtux.ch/ [3] >http://www.comunica-ch.net/ (cf. sections II.5 and II.6) [4] >Development NGO funded by Swiss protestant churches; http://www.ppp.ch/ >[5] http://www.coli.uni-sb.de/~brawer/ > (I'm not there anymore and should have moved my page a long time >ago..) > > > > >_______________________________________________ >wilhelmtux-discussion mailing list wilhelmtux-discussion(a)wilhelmtux.ch >http://wilhelmtux.ch/vmailman/listinfo/wilhelmtux-discussion > _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

1 0

Overview of Software Patent Issue
by Seth Johnson 23 Mar '03

23 Mar '03

A very good slide show providing an overview of the software patent issue as it is being played out in Europe: > http://gibuskro.lautre.net/patents/ W3C PPWG members may find the XML-related software patents at http://gibuskro.lautre.net/patents/slide25-0.html of particular interest. I have pasted the contents of that slide at the bottom of this message. Below is the table of contents, as well as the contents of several slides describing the juridical transition in Europe toward allowing patents on "mental methods." >From a message to the patents(a)aful.org list. Seth Johnson --- > http://gibuskro.lautre.net/patents/ The non-patent side of software patents by Gérald Sédrati-Dinet (mailto:sedrati@bigfoot.com) Interest of software patents for a small software publisher Detailed Table of Contents First patent (obvious) justification : Defensive Defensive - Other means of "protection" Defensive - "Protection" from what ? Defensive - Cost of law suit Defensive - Cross-licensing Second patent (obvious) justification : Offensive Offensive - Incentive to R & D Offensive - Software intrinsic properties Offensive - SMEs Offensive - Economic model Offensive - Economic model and natural experiment Last patent (obvious) justification : Advertise Advertise - Dubious patent quality Advertise - Inside a vitiated system Advertise - Other means Beyond the software patent system : Social impact Social impact - Software "as such" Social impact - Road taken by EPO leading to privatization of ideas Social impact - Examples of mental methods (1/2) Social impact - Examples of mental methods (2/2) Social impact - Software's specific nature Conclusion Conclusion - Profit vs Loss Conclusion - Non-patent side Conclusion - Example of potential infringement The End --- > http://gibuskro.lautre.net/patents/slide18-0.html Social impact - Road taken by EPO leading to privatization of ideas ------------------------------------------------------------ Computer programs are not patentable Europe Patent Convention, Munich, 5 October 1973 Inventions containing a computer program are patentable Case of Schlumberger, Court of Appeal of Paris 15 June 1981: Whereas the process claimed comprises six successive stages, some of which indisputably involve the application of computer programmes, but the whole description of the patent is not reduced to information processing by computers. Machines containing an innovating computer program are patentable Generic robot containing a computer program that control the robot: stress on hardware part Algorithmic process processing information with a technical effect are patentable Case of Vicom T 208/84 Technical Board of Appeal 15 July 1986: Even if the idea underlying an invention may be considered to reside in a mathematical method a claim directed to a technical process in which the method is used does not seek protection for the mathematical method as such. The virtual machine theory Koch & Sterzel case T 0026/86 Technical Board of Appeal 21 May 1987:If the program controls the operation of a conventional general-purpose computer so as technically to alter its functioning, the unit consisting of program and computer combined may be a patentable invention. Computer programs that are not "as such" are patentable Case of International Business Machines Corporation T 0935/97 Technical Board of Appeal 4 february 1986:Programs for computer must be considerated as patentable invention when they have a technical character. Process of management by a computer EP756731: Interactive Information Selection Apparatus (for selecting the items for a meal) Mental methods ? --- > http://gibuskro.lautre.net/patents/slide19-0.html Social impact - Examples of mental methods (1/2) ------------------------------------------------------------ Educative methods US5443036 1993: Method of exercing a cat US6015947 1999: Method of teaching music US6024577 Fujitsu 1997 : Network-based education system with capability to provide review material according to individual students' understanding levels Management methods EP209907 1989: General-purpose management system, method for operating said system and transfer slip US6070142 Andersen Consulting 1998: Virtual customer sales and service center and method Electronic trading methods US5724424 Open Market 1995: Digital active advertising US6029141 Amazon.com 1997: Internet-based customer referral system --- > http://gibuskro.lautre.net/patents/slide20-0.html Social impact - Examples of mental methods (2/2) ------------------------------------------------------------ Consulting methods US5734890 Gartner Group 1995: System and method for analyzing procurement decisions and customer satisfaction Financial methods US4752877 & EP0278132 College Savings Bank 1986: Method and apparatus for funding a future liability of uncertain cost Social methods US6092051 & EP1017025 NEC 1995, 2000: Receipt-free electronic voting method and system --- > http://gibuskro.lautre.net/patents/slide25-0.html Conclusion - Example of potential infringement ------------------------------------------------------------ SME that publishes a software on an XML repository and that is applying software patents for a dynamic page ranking strategy for a crawler and for sorting responses to queries Results of Search for "xml repository": 2 patents. Results of Search for "xml database": 6 patents. Results of Search for "xml query": 2 patents. Results of Search for "page rank": 8 patents. Results of Search for "sort query": 18 patents. US6263332 Vignette Corp 17 January 2001: System and method for query processing of structured documents A computer-implemented method of retrieving information in a first markup language through a query engine and presenting the information in any required markup language. A user inputs a query and may invoke a number of transformative sequences. These sequences contain a markup language pattern and an action, which may include transforming the tags in the first markup language to tags in a different markup language. The appropriate transformative sequence is selected and the pattern from the transformative sequence is compiled. The compiled pattern is used to perform rapid and efficient searches of documents in the database. A predicate check using the binary coding of the node as well as ancestor information confirms the node. The leaf information associated with a confirmed node is then stored. If necessary, the action from the transformative sequence is applied to change the markup language of the leaf information to that of the user http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/search-bool.html -- DRM is Theft! We are the Stakeholders! New Yorkers for Fair Use http://www.nyfairuse.org [CC] Counter-copyright: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cc/cc.html 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.

2 1

Overview of Software Patent Issue
by Seth Johnson 22 Mar '03

22 Mar '03

1 0

Spanish discussion list
by Jerome Dominguez 19 Mar '03

19 Mar '03

By chance, I learned the existence of the Spanish discussion list of the FSF Europe : http://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-es AFAIK, this list seems not have been announced here. BTW, why not use Savannah as for the other fsfe-* lists ?

1 0

Creative Commons: GPL-Copyleft versus Share Alike
by Wouter Vanden Hove 19 Mar '03

19 Mar '03

Last Fosdem the FSF gave the Free Software Award to Larry Lessig for the advancement of Free Software. But what is the official stance of the FSF's on the Creative Commons Share-Alike License? http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/1.0/ It is a copyleft license, but it for software the GPL is much better. I understand the Creative Commons is targeted mainly at other disciplines of works, but the Creative Commons says nothing about software. Shouldn't the Creative Commons be urged by the FSF's to include the GPL as their preferred copyleft software-license? Wouter

3 4

Free Software Party all over France this week end
by Pascal Desroche 18 Mar '03

18 Mar '03

Hi; maybe you've already heard about it, maybe not. This the second year now that there is Free Software national party in France. It relays upon individual activism, as usually. From march 21 to march 23, there was 9 cities in France involved last year, 15 this year, maybe more to come in the week. There is a website where anyone can get info about the event (sorry it's in French only) http://www.libre-en-fete.net Maybe you could all relay information about it so that people will come to France for fun, but, more important, this party could spread to other countries next year. There is a logo available on the website and if you need more explanations, please ask ; The idea at the beginning is to create an event to celebrate free software developers and to gather people around talkings and demonstrations in fancy places. For example, we set up something in Brittany (west coast of France) in a farm. Farmers will bring the food they make and we set up a network in the farm, connected to the net through DSL, and we invite everybody. If someone wants to show up here, I can manage for a free hosting :) Pascal

1 0

my distribution scheme for GPLed software
by Jerome Alet 17 Mar '03

17 Mar '03

Hi, For those of you who might be interested, wrt my post in : http://mail.fsfeurope.org/pipermail/discussion/2003-February/003775.html As an experiment, I've implemented such a (somewhat modified) distribution scheme for a project of mine, PyKota (print quota solution for CUPS), as described on : http://www.librelogiciel.com/software/PyKota/Download/action_Download The interesting thing is that it seems to work. Considering that the project begins, that it has no real documentation yet (command line help excepted), and that the public is small (I think), I can say that (to my great surprise) in 15 days I've already got one person who paid for the tarball, and several others who will push for the person in charge (with money) to pay. Out of the persons who told me they will certainely pay, one excepted, they've already downloaded and used the CVS version. (of course I know not all will pay) I thought this may be of some interest to the readers of this list. Could this be an ethically correct solution to make "some" money out of Free Software ? Comments, especially about the "ethically correct" part, are more than welcome. Jerome Alet

9 18

Re: World Summit on the Information Society
by xdrudis＠tinet.org 14 Mar '03

14 Mar '03

> Hi all > > It seems that the Free Software movement has well-informed allies in > rather unexpected areas. At least to me, it was news that traditional > development-collaboration organizations are concerned about > InformationTechnology, to an extent that they are discussing > software patents with > the Patent Office. So, please let me describe an experience before > I ask > a few questions. > >From what I've heard and my own little experience, talking with Patent Offices is a natural thing to do, but brings many little results. They listen and ignore any amount of arguments, wasting scarce time and delaying other actions. In fact they are hardly in a position to improve the system, given their constraints and incentives.They seem to ignore the patent system is in a suicide race and it may be wiser for them in the long term to help reform it. Conctacting legislators (voted politicians) is usually more productive. In fact, the Culture Committe opinion on the swpat directive does contain a paragrpah complaining of world inequality in patent property (97% / 3%). http://www.europarl.eu.int/meetdocs/committees/juri/20030219/487019en.pdf > I'd be sorry if all this was old news to everyone but me. I did try to > find information about FSF's participation at WSIS on the Web, but > I had > no real success. I think it would be quite awkward if such a big- > scaleevent about the "Information Society," which also is a chance > to meet > many potential supporters, was without the presence of one of the most > important groups. > At least I wasn't aware so thanks for posting.

1 0

Research Symbol SFCI
by discussion＠fsfeurope.org 12 Mar '03

12 Mar '03

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

Discussion March 2003