22 ms·
Software will not be patentable in New Zealand
- pessimizer 13y agoCraig Foss?
- spodek 13y ago"Commerce Minister Craig Foss said today that following industry consultation he had decided to remove the patentability of software from the Patents Bill, which is currently before Parliament." If anyone is going to support Free and Open Source Software, it's going to be a guy named Foss. The government asked its citizens their thoughts "a recent poll of more than 1000 Kiwi IT professionals found 94 per cent wanted to see software patents gone." -- As overwhelming as 94% is, I wonder the motivations of the last 6%. The U.S. is in software patents so deep, the only way I can see it changing is watching other countries move faster without the drain on innovation and the need to pay lawyers when you code.
- homosaur 13y agoProbably the last 6% either hold patents or really don't quite get the issue. Lots of folks work in closed source/proprietary only and have no problem with the idea of making everyone license every little thing.
- sage_joch 13y agoThis sounds suspiciously like a government that works for its people.
- te_chris 13y ago[partisan alert] I wouldn't go too far on that. If you're poor and unemployed here you probably don't feel like the govt. are working for you all that much.
- lvxn0va 13y agoExcept when you need to head for the hospital, no?
- lancewiggs 13y agoI'm continuously amazed by all of the major political parties here in New Zealand who keep using logic and facts instead of merely political stances. Our process of making laws is open, listens to the people as well as lobbyists, and yet allows room for policy differences.
- SeanDav 13y agoNZ makes some great laws (this is one of them) but it makes a few dodgy ones as well - like trying to give Chimpanzees human rights. Sorry I brought that one up but is one of those laws that has always just made me say - "What the fuuuuuc....."
- holloway 13y agoGreat Ape personhood, or at least granting them the right to not have cruel tests done, has been done by several other nations not just New Zealand: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ape_personhood http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ape_personhood I can't remember the exact wording but one provision was about how they couldn't be exported unless it was in their best interests. E.g. you can't sell them a circus overseas in which they would likely receive cruel treatment. So it's not about calling them people, it's about giving them some rights because they have sentience.
- SeanDav 13y agoI don't agree with the label, I do agree with the principle. Many animals show signs of sentience and even if they don't, they should not be allowed to undergo cruel testing. To try to only apply this to great apes shows a lack of understanding of the issues involved. It is often human nature to be guilty of anthropomorphizing. The intentions are noble, but the focus is too narrow and the label is quite frankly, ridiculous.
- rjd 13y agoI found this extremely humorous (John Stewart Show on gun violence and politician motives): http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TYbY45rHj8w http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=T... @ 2:00 it speaks volumes about US politics (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TYbY45rHj8w#t=121s http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=T...)
- narcissus 13y agoOff topic, but thanks for that link: while I'm not going to go into the politics, those clips make me want to go back home now, just because of those scenes from Australia...
- loceng 13y agoYou should get rid of all patents if that's the case. Patents slow down innovation period. And software patents can be non-obvious, just like hardware patents -- software and hardware innovations can be just as equally obvious to anyone who starts to work on a problem.
- lostlogin 13y agoDon't be fooled - we're selling off our assets as you speak. But hey, we can buy shares in them, so the thing I partly owned I can pay money for and partly own it again.
- zem 13y agothere's even a term for it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_determinism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominative_determinism
- polemic 13y agoNaw.. if you've got a 3 or 4 letter last name and you work in/on/around I.T. you're going to run into an acronym that happens to be your name at some point.
- sitharus 13y agoCraig Foss probably wouldn't understand FOSS if you hit him with it. That's how the SOP got in there in the first place. Alas it's not a case of nominative determinism.
- koalaman 13y ago"The U.S. is in software patents so deep, the only way I can see it changing is watching other countries move faster without the drain on innovation and the need to pay lawyers when you code." Lawyers have a lot of money. Those laws aren't going to change until the role of money in politics changes. I wouldn't hold my breath.
- dsuth 13y agoYeh, because that's worked so well in the US for gun control and health cover! (Referring to the quote)
- anoncow 13y ago>I wonder the motivations of the last 6% People in corporate take pride in IP. The number of patents a team has applied for is a measure of its success. As a proponent of foss, I believe software patents hinder development, because it makes the work I do difficult. But people working in 'corporate' IT see it as a reward for their work. I am sure many of them celebrated the recent World IP day and made plans to apply for more patents.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- loceng 13y agoMotivations of the last 6% are probably relating to trying to create a business that won't just be copied by someone who has access to resources faster than them, e.g. entrepreneurs and business folk..
- guard-of-terra 13y agoWhen you create a business you're not applying for patents, and when you apply for patents you're not creating a business.
- loceng 13y agoHave you tried getting funding before for something that's complex, though then could easily be copied / re-engineered by big companies? Investors will know this and you won't be able to start the business with investors' money in most cases like this.
- guard-of-terra 13y agoAnd how exactly do patents help you here? Can you provide some examples?
- jgamman 13y agoor it will be superceded by the Trans Pacific Partnership. But I can't tell since the text hasn't been officially released. Leaked drafts don't look good though.
- qu4z-2 13y ago"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." There's always another bill someone's trying to force on us :/
- acabal 13y agoWhat does this mean for software companies in New Zealand? If they sell software in the US (and who doesn't, with the internet and all), I assume they're still on the hook for US patent law?
- NickNameNick 13y agoMy NZ based employer does business in the US, and hold US software and/or business method patents. I can't speak for my company, but I personally feel that the whole software patent system is ridiculous, and I'm pleased that the local situation isn't going to go down that road. At least, not until we get railroaded by the 'Trans Pacific Partnership'(TPP) Treaty, or its newer cousins, whenever they show up. In the mean time, I would assume that we would be unable to sell something that violated an US patent, in the US, but wouldn't be liable for sales of that might violate a US patent in NZ, unless there is some other bi-lateral (or unilateral) treaty covering the situation that I am not aware of.
- randall 13y agoI'd like to know that too. I mean Xero has offices in the US certainly, so they'd be able to be served and the sort, but what about NZ exclusive shops?
- AnthonyMouse 13y agoSo the scenario is that a company in NZ distributes software using NZ servers to users in the US? I can imagine some problems. What happens if they sue the users in the US? What happens if they go to ICE and have the domain you're distributing from seized? What happens if one of the company's officers goes to the US on vacation and gets served? I guess there's one way to find out. But it seems like the better plan is to fight to eliminate software patents everywhere instead of pretending the internet is going to respect every nation's borders or vice versa.
- holloway 13y agoYes, that jurisdiction's law applies, although NZ companies can apply for US patents too. Further, I would presume that web software hosted outside the US could avoid having the server component covered by the US jurisdiction. It could be just patents on client-side tech.
- marssaxman 13y agoNew Zealand seems like such a sensible place.
- Raticide 13y agoIt is... sometimes.
- Neepy 13y agohttp://3strikes.net.nz/information/law-basics http://3strikes.net.nz/information/law-basics :\
- sitharus 13y agoThat's a nasty one, but such an easy law to avoid. Use direct downloads or download movies, since the movie companies are protesting paying costs by not filing complaints. I'd rather it didn't exist though.
- meric 13y agoEven in its nastiness it is sensible in its own right - $25 cost for the copyright holder to send a notice. The notice can also be challenged by the accused infringer.
- qu4z-2 13y agoWell, also you can't get another notice within 28 days. And if I recall correctly, you have to get three notices within 9 months. So basically if you manage to spend less than 1/3rd of your time "On Notice" you should be sweet as. DISCLAIMER: IANAL EDIT: Actually, fence-post error. The correct figure is ~2/9ths, as penalties trigger on the receipt of the third notice (so we can't count its period).
- Matsta 13y agoI think everyone forgot about the 3 strikes law here. None of the big ISP's enforce it AT ALL. I've heard a couple of small ISP's kick a couple of people off back when it was first introduced but since then there's been nothing. Considering most of my friends here all torrent everything off The Pirate Bay (They don't use private trackers :p), I don't think I've heard of a single person I know get in trouble. Telecom NZ would see that enforcing that law as a cost to them (they are pretty anal about spending money on things other than marketing), so they would probably not do anything until the government takes them to court.
- spajus 13y agoHow can anyone support legalized extortion like software patents? Hopefully this will change in global scale, when new decision makers will replace the old farts who don't have a clue what software development actually is about. Respect for New Zealand for embracing the change!
- shmerl 13y agoReally good news. Now, can someone do the same thing in US please?
- knackers 13y agoIt will be interesting to see what the practical effect of this is over the long term. The new SOP says that certain processes involving software will still be patentable, which seems remarkably similar to the Supreme Court's finding in Diehr.
- GigabyteCoin 13y agoIf you're not making the software that you yourself use, you probably want it to be free. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Software_companies_of_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Software_companies_of_... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Software_companies_of_New_Zealand http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Software_companies_of_...
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- john_w_t_b 13y agoThis will set a good precedent for other developed countries. Let's hope Australia goes next, and maybe Scandinavia.
- zmmmmm 13y agoIt would be very cool if a major software house set up or moved their development shop to NZ so as to be free to develop and test their products in a patent-free environment. Sort of like we have tax havens ... software development havens? It would be even cooler if a few different countries did this and set up a sort of, software patent-free economic zone.
- stephen_g 13y agoThe problem is that any company that sells to people in the US can have their product banned from import if it is found to infringe on patents there.
- zmmmmm 13y agoIt could create a whole new architecture for software - just the patented parts hosted remotely in software-patent-free zones while the rest is brought local to the customer. At least for the types of products where that works.
- pbhjpbhj 13y ago>while the rest is brought local to the customer // Sounds like contributory infringement to me. Why not just host the entire thing distally and access via VPN? The answer lies in where a product is considered to be sold. If you're targeting customers in the USA say then it doesn't matter where your server is you're still considered to be selling in the USA. YMMV and I'm afraid I don't have any caselaw handy to cite on this.
- lostlogin 13y agoI have to ask (I do t understand this stuff), how do you ban software from import - login to NZ server, pay, download? Would a banner saying that people in the US are forbidden from doing this be enough to get the seller off the hook?
- A1kmm 13y ago
- Kiro 13y agoIs this really that newsworthy? I thought the US was the only country in the world where patents apply to software.
- Samuel_Michon 13y agoIn Japan as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patent#Japan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patent#Japan
- throwawaykf1 13y agoNo, most of EU as well. See this subthread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5679867 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5679867
- mappu 13y ago♫ Pōkarekare ana
- forgottenpaswrd 13y agoWow, that increments the possibility of finding weapons of mass destruction there to the roof!
- cpursley 13y agoOr big-time torrentors ; ) Oh wait...
- sirtel 13y agoapproval. A software is just like a math formula or expression. Can a math formula be patentable?
- wildster 13y agoThe UK and Europe have similar restrictions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_under_United_Kingdom_patent_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_patents_under_United_K...
- polymatter 13y agoThats misleading, since software patents are regularly granted anyway. From the article you quoted: "Patent laws in the UK and throughout Europe specify a non-exhaustive list of excluded things that are not regarded as inventions to the extent that a patent application relates to the excluded thing as such. This list includes programs for computers. Despite this, the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) regularly grants patents to inventions that are partly or wholly implemented in software" The patent situation is definitely better in UK and Europe than in US, but actual enforcement is key. The problem is using ambiguity of English to justify the software as having a "technical effect" and patentable by that metric. At which point saying that software isn't patentable is at best misleading since you could argue that all software has a "technical effect".
- throwawaykf1 13y agoIt's not "ambiguity of English" -- all (usefulsoftware does have a technical effect. Or would you say software should be excluded from the "tech industry" and people should stop calling themselves "software engineers"? This is why it is mostly patentable in the EU. About the only thing the "technical effect" limitation prevents is business method patents.
- polymatter 13y agoI don't know the rules in detail, but the claim is that "software isn't patentable". And yet software with a technical effect is patentable. But all software has a technical effect. Ergo, software isn't patentable because its software, its patentable because it has a technical effect and UKIPO has granted patents on software on that basis. This means that claiming "software isn't patentable" is a misleading claim at best.
- ultimoo 13y agoWe recently covered patents and basic copyright law in a technical writing class. What my professors taught me was that 'patent is a contract between society and inventors to encourage progress'. And it seems fair on certain levels. I am a huge proponent of FOSS, I respect Stallman, I've read his book and I think patent trolls are dicks. However, is it a good idea to make software not patentable? Will we as a community fail to innovate then? Disclaimer: I only skimmed over the OP
- eyko 13y agoTake it to the extreme: say IBM patented the `operating system software`, for example. Would Microsoft and/or Apple have come to exist as projects out of a basement or dorm? Say someone patented a media player that could hold a library in the cloud and could stream it to the user via a network / internet... would Spotify, Rdio, or any other competitors exist today? Software patents are suffocating innovators, rather than inspiring them.
- throwawaykf1 13y agoMisconceptions abound. You cannot patent "operating system software" because it is an abstract concept with no embodiment, like "flying car" or "hyperdrive spaceship". And people did patent "media player with music in the cloud", or more accurately, various aspects thereof. Spotify famously got sued over a patent on a specific way to do DRM for streaming music, for example, when they entered the US. They just licensed it and moved on. The streaming music industry is growing all the time, despite tons of patents in the field. Conversely, if you think weak patent rights means unbounded innovation, I haven't seen any particularly impressive tech originating in China or India. Things are patented left and right in the US, and always have been, and I don't see innovation here slowing down any. And it would not be surprising if people understood the realities of patents instead of believing what tech media tells them (insert reference to pg's "Submarine" essay here).
- eyko 13y ago> You cannot patent "operating system software" because it is an abstract concept with no embodiment, like "flying car" or "hyperdrive spaceship" Exactly why I started my sentence with _take it to the extreme_. Innovation in the US may not have slowed down (I would argue that it has, although I'm not in the US), but it has definitely become quite expensive. In my opinion, that's a barrier for independent software developers.
- jimworm 13y agoWhile software that violates other countries' patents cannot be sold to those countries, the sale of software is not the only use of software. The visual effects industry for example can sell their visual effects, and this is a major part of the NZ software ecosystem. As a kiwi in Europe I can say that this will affect any future decision on where I'll base my business. That is until the US comes in with their bullying tactics and buy our PM with 5 minutes of facetime with Obama.
- cpursley 13y agoI've always felt that NZ was a sensible place for startups (in theory, I've never been). A nice clean country, easy of doing business, no capital gains tax, respectable government, no drones or porno scanners, California-like in north (and amazing scenery every in general), impressive # of tech companies in relation to size. They'd be smart to do a Start-up Chile sort of program. If I were a VC and wanted an adventure, I'd set up shop in Auckland and target the promising startups who couldn't get US visas. http://ease-doing-business.findthedata.org/ http://ease-doing-business.findthedata.org/
- coherentpony 13y agoNew Zealand is such an awesome country. Wasn't it also voted the most free country in the world? I have no sources to back that claim up; I read it somewhere.