{"id":1380,"date":"2005-04-21T17:03:00","date_gmt":"2005-04-21T15:03:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/vizZzion.org\/blog\/2005\/04\/on-software-patents-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel\/"},"modified":"2005-04-21T17:03:00","modified_gmt":"2005-04-21T15:03:00","slug":"on-software-patents-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vizZzion.org\/blog\/2005\/04\/on-software-patents-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel\/","title":{"rendered":"on software patents &#8211; light at the end of the tunnel?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>It seems that finally someone in Brussels has seen the light.<\/p>\n<p>\t\tI just stumbled across a somewhat lengty but nonetheless well-written and even for<br \/>\nnon-laywer types like me <a\nhref=\"http:\/\/vizZzion.org\/stuff\/Rocard-patents-working-paper.pdf\">understandable working paper<\/a><br \/>\nfrom economist and former French prime minister <i>Michel Rocard<\/i>, who is &#8211; and that&#8217;s probably<br \/>\nthe most important thing &#8211; the European Parliament&#8217;s draftsperson or &#8220;rapporteur&#8221; on the directive,<br \/>\nand so it is likely that his views will be taken very seriously. (Well likeliness of this kind of<br \/>\nthings has more than once proven to be worthless, thanks mr<br \/>\n<i>&#8220;I-can-ignore-both-my-national-and-the-European-parliament&#8221;-<\/i>Brinkhorst, but there&#8217;s hope<br \/>\n&#8230;). I&#8217;ve ripped a couple of lines from the paper which should give a fairly good idea what Rocard<br \/>\nwants to see as directive with respect to the software patents issue, here we go:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\n\t\t\tSoftware is in fact the combination in an original work of one or more algorithms, that<br \/>\nis to<br \/>\n\t\t\tsay, a set of mathematical formulae. As Albert Einstein has said, a mathematical formula<br \/>\nis<br \/>\n\t\t\tnot patentable. It is by nature an idea, like a book, a set of words, or a chord in<br \/>\nmusic.<\/p>\n<p>[&#8230;]<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\tFor that work to be communicable and have an effect, a part must start to move, an<br \/>\nelectrical,<br \/>\n\t\t\tradio or light signal must be produced, data must appear on a screen, or some physical<br \/>\neffect<br \/>\n\t\t\tmust be unleashed. What is evidently patentable are, firstly, the sensors and, secondly,<br \/>\nthe<br \/>\n\t\t\teffectors that supply the computer with data processable by the software and that obtain<br \/>\nfrom<br \/>\n\t\t\tthe data ultimately produced by the software in its language a physical effect<br \/>\nconstituting the<br \/>\n\t\t\ttechnical so lut ion to the technical problem posed. <strong>The distinction that we are<br \/>\nafter thus<br \/>\n\t\t\t\tseparates the immaterial world from the material, or rather, from the physical<br \/>\nworld.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>[&#8230;]<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Technical field&#8221; means an industrial field of application<br \/>\nrequiring the use of controllable forces of nature<br \/>\n\t\t\tto obtain predictable results in the physical world.<\/p>\n<p>[&#8230;]<\/p>\n<p>To enable the directive to permit the patenting of<br \/>\ncomputer-generated inventions while<br \/>\n\t\t\tpreventing the patentability of software programs, it will be necessary to address the<br \/>\n\t\t\tfollowing points:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>\n\t\t\t\t\t[&#8230;] we need to specify that the<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tprocessing of the data should not be regarded as a technical field within the<br \/>\nmeaning of<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tpatent law, and that innovations in the processing of data do not constitute<br \/>\ninventions<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\twithin the meaning of patent\n\t\t\t\t<\/li>\n<li>\n\t\t\t\t\t[&#8230;] to secure interoperability, strengthen the confirmation of the rights<br \/>\narising from Articles 5<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tand 6 of Directive 91\/250, by ensuring that when use of a patented technology is<br \/>\nneeded<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tfor the sole purpose of ensuring interoperability between two systems, such use<br \/>\nshould not<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\tbe regarded as infringing a patent.\n\t\t\t\t<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>\t\tAs you read, he makes some pretty good points there, so let&#8217;s hope this amendment will<br \/>\nbecome reality. For the mere humans that don&#8217;t fully understand the legislative procedures of the<br \/>\nEuropean Community, in short, an absolute majority of the members of the European Parliament in the<br \/>\nsecond reading on June 6 is necessary to prevent Rocard&#8217;s working paper from entering into force as<br \/>\ndirective. (See <a\nhref=\"http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Codecision_procedure#Second_reading\">Wikipedia<\/a> for the gory<br \/>\ndetails on European legislature.)<\/p>\n<p>On a personal note, I really would like this directive to become reality, in the<br \/>\nhope that I&#8217;ll not lose my freedom as an Open Source software developer, and that I will maybe at<br \/>\nsome point regain a little trust in all the effects the process of European integration brings to<br \/>\nus.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>It seems that finally someone in Brussels has seen the light. I just stumbled across a somewhat lengty but nonetheless well-written and even for non-laywer types like me understandable working paper from economist and former French prime minister Michel Rocard, who is &#8211; and that&#8217;s probably the most important thing &#8211; the European Parliament&#8217;s draftsperson&hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/vizZzion.org\/blog\/2005\/04\/on-software-patents-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">on software patents &#8211; light at the end of the tunnel?<\/span> <span class=\"meta-nav\" aria-hidden=\"true\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[29],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1380","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-kde"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/vizZzion.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1380","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/vizZzion.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/vizZzion.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vizZzion.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vizZzion.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1380"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/vizZzion.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1380\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/vizZzion.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1380"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vizZzion.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1380"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vizZzion.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1380"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}