4 ms·

Open source proponents need to realize that, while it is possible for the Supreme Court to enter a ruling making software non-patentable, this likely is wishful

by grellas 17y ago

Open source proponents need to realize that, while it is possible for the Supreme Court to enter a ruling making software non-patentable, this likely is wishful thinking. The authority for patent laws ultimately comes from the Constitution and finds its implementation in statutes passed by Congress. There is nothing in either the Constitution or in the existing patent statutes that expressly allows courts to limit process or business method patents (the type at issue in the case before the Supreme Court) to those that pass the so-called "machine-or-transformation" test imposed by the lower court. Thus, it is by no means assured that such a relatively narrow test will be upheld. If it is not, then the looser standards likely will be back in play, meaning that a broad variety of process patents (include software-related) will be capable of being granted. For those interested, this case has generated huge interest in the tech world and, as of a couple of months ago, at least 44 such companies had filed briefs with the Court (for what it is worth, most of them favor rejecting the lower court's ruling and thereby letting more process patents be issued). A good summary of the positions appears here: http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2009/08/briefs-in-bilski.html http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2009/08/briefs-in-bilski.htm.... I am not saying that software patents shouldn't be abolished - just that such a result is highly unlikely to come from any ruling in this case.

cabalamat 17y ago
> I am not saying that software patents shouldn't be abolished - just that such a result is highly unlikely to come from any ruling in this case. You're probably right. The best way for a person to help get software patents abolished, IMO, would be to join their local Pirate Party -- http://www.pp-international.net/ http://www.pp-international.net/
- cookiecaper 17y ago
  Heh, no it's not. That'll just get you marked a radical and summarily ignored by anyone with power. Not that I agree with that, but that's how things are. The _real_ way to get software patents taken care of is, as with any other matter of public policy, to convince large swaths of major, consistent contributors to the campaigns of your incumbent representatives to press the issue. This will probably be difficult because people with money want to do evil with these patents and they will just counter your pressure, though there is some hope that the big players will decide that software patents are too dangerous altogether if a few more injunctions like the one against the sale of Microsoft Word come out (see i4i v. Microsoft). But right now, Microsoft is trying to use its patents to neuter its open-source competitors, so they may value that too highly. We'll have to see!
  - cabalamat 17y ago
    (on joining the Pirate Party) > Heh, no it's not. That'll just get you marked a radical and summarily ignored by anyone with power. Not that I agree with that, but that's how things are. The Pirate Party already has one MEP. If (probably when) the Lisbon Treaty is passed, they'll have two. The Pirate Party will probably be in power in several countries over the next 10 years (as part of coalitions). > The _real_ way to get software patents taken care of is, as with any other matter of public policy, to convince large swaths of major, consistent contributors to the campaigns of your incumbent representatives to press the issue. This might be true in the USA under their current political system. But as you imply from what you say, the USA isn't properly a democracy, it's an oligarchy ruled by corporations. This is in fact a bigger problem than software patents. It isn't true in Europe, where Pirate Parties have a siginificant chance of getting people elected, due to using more democratic electoral systems. If Pirate manage to get software patents abolished or neutered in one major jurisdiction, they will probably indirectly win in the rest of the world. > This will probably be difficult because people with money want to do evil with these patents I agree. > But right now, Microsoft is trying to use its patents to neuter its open-source competitors, so they may value that too highly. That's certainly part of Microsoft's plan for their patents.
dminor 17y ago
> There is nothing in either the Constitution or in the existing patent statutes that expressly allows courts to limit process or business method patents Except that they basically didn't exist before the StateStreet case. The court has signaled that it may be willing to reconsider its previous ruling, so there is definitely hope.

by grellas 17y ago

cabalamat 17y ago

> I am not saying that software patents shouldn't be abolished - just that such a result is highly unlikely to come from any ruling in this case. You're probably right. The best way for a person to help get software patents abolished, IMO, would be to join their local Pirate Party -- http://www.pp-international.net/ http://www.pp-international.net/

cookiecaper 17y ago
Heh, no it's not. That'll just get you marked a radical and summarily ignored by anyone with power. Not that I agree with that, but that's how things are. The _real_ way to get software patents taken care of is, as with any other matter of public policy, to convince large swaths of major, consistent contributors to the campaigns of your incumbent representatives to press the issue. This will probably be difficult because people with money want to do evil with these patents and they will just counter your pressure, though there is some hope that the big players will decide that software patents are too dangerous altogether if a few more injunctions like the one against the sale of Microsoft Word come out (see i4i v. Microsoft). But right now, Microsoft is trying to use its patents to neuter its open-source competitors, so they may value that too highly. We'll have to see!
- cabalamat 17y ago
  (on joining the Pirate Party) > Heh, no it's not. That'll just get you marked a radical and summarily ignored by anyone with power. Not that I agree with that, but that's how things are. The Pirate Party already has one MEP. If (probably when) the Lisbon Treaty is passed, they'll have two. The Pirate Party will probably be in power in several countries over the next 10 years (as part of coalitions). > The _real_ way to get software patents taken care of is, as with any other matter of public policy, to convince large swaths of major, consistent contributors to the campaigns of your incumbent representatives to press the issue. This might be true in the USA under their current political system. But as you imply from what you say, the USA isn't properly a democracy, it's an oligarchy ruled by corporations. This is in fact a bigger problem than software patents. It isn't true in Europe, where Pirate Parties have a siginificant chance of getting people elected, due to using more democratic electoral systems. If Pirate manage to get software patents abolished or neutered in one major jurisdiction, they will probably indirectly win in the rest of the world. > This will probably be difficult because people with money want to do evil with these patents I agree. > But right now, Microsoft is trying to use its patents to neuter its open-source competitors, so they may value that too highly. That's certainly part of Microsoft's plan for their patents.

dminor 17y ago

> There is nothing in either the Constitution or in the existing patent statutes that expressly allows courts to limit process or business method patents Except that they basically didn't exist before the StateStreet case. The court has signaled that it may be willing to reconsider its previous ruling, so there is definitely hope.