Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / THANK YOU Wlodzimierz Marcinski, if you are a EU citizen you should thank to!

Author
Message
Vai mamar na pila
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Nov 2004
Location: Behind Your Behind
Posted: 8th Jan 2005 22:59
http://thankpoland.info/

Quote: "The undersigned wish to express their sincere thanks to the Polish
government for their action to remove the "A-item" of adopting the
"Software Patent Directive" from the agenda of the Agricultural
Council meeting on December 21, 2004. It would have been a
horrible mistake for the European Union to adopt this "Software
Patent Directive"."


dto the same, i sinned, if it wanst for him, we woudl be doomed, patented software suckz a lot, as seen in america.
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 9th Jan 2005 00:15
Ah good - so that directive never got through then. Thats good.

Visit http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~nickk/
I have no signature.
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 9th Jan 2005 00:22
I don't know the details, but that's obviously a fantastic event. I'm in the US but I'll thank him anyhow.

*claps*

IanM
Retired Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 11th Sep 2002
Location: In my moon base
Posted: 9th Jan 2005 00:30
That should be 'It hasn't got though *so far*'.

Have you seen the example web page that the ffii have posted up, with all patented parts labelled? http://webshop.ffii.org It's a good job that none of that nonsense is going to happen ... at least for now

*** Coming soon - Network Plug-in - Check my site for info ***
For free Plug-ins and source code http://www.matrix1.demon.co.uk
Vai mamar na pila
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Nov 2004
Location: Behind Your Behind
Posted: 9th Jan 2005 03:58
yep, thanks for you support, remember guys, to anyone that readthis, lets all thank the man !
Philip
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Jun 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 9th Jan 2005 07:40
Its just another example of why the EU is mostly a disaster.

This directive is utter stupidity. Like much of what the EU produces, btw.

Philip

What do you mean, bears aren't supposed to wear hats and a tie? P3.2ghz / 1 gig / GeForce FX 5900 128meg / WinXP home
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 9th Jan 2005 08:24
Indeed... And its mostly corrupt too.

Visit http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~nickk/
I have no signature.
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 9th Jan 2005 09:35
What's wrong with software patents?


--[GameBasic - Coming Soon]-- ^^^ banner generously designed by TheBigBabou
Lord Ozzum
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Oct 2003
Location: Beyond the Realms of Death
Posted: 9th Jan 2005 09:42
a lot of stupid sh!t is pattented.

"I don’t want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it by not dying."
---Woody Allen
"I Wanna Rock and roll all night, and party everyday!" --Kiss
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 9th Jan 2005 10:04
Suffice to say that if the kind of software patents they were trying to push through there had gone through back in the late 80s, Microsoft could have patented GUIs because they got there before Mac.

Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 9th Jan 2005 11:01
Quote: " a lot of stupid sh!t is pattented."


Yes I know that, but a lot of other non-computer related things are patented too.

Quote: "Microsoft could have patented GUIs because they got there before Mac."


Actually Xerox got there first.


--[GameBasic - Coming Soon]-- ^^^ banner generously designed by TheBigBabou
DrakeX
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 26th Aug 2002
Location:
Posted: 9th Jan 2005 11:11
"Yes I know that, but a lot of other non-computer related things are patented too."

it's somehow different on the computer. for example, MS recently patented double-clicks. now, tell me - is that very fair or logical? if you look at the list of software patents, they're usually very stupid indeed. physical things and designs, i can understand - but there's something about patenting software that just seems very wrong.

"when it's done" means "we have no idea, we forgot to do that; we were hoping you would all forget we promised <insert exotic promise here>"
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 9th Jan 2005 12:57 Edited at: 9th Jan 2005 12:59
Quote: "Actually Xerox got there first."


I was under the impression their GUI product was unreleased when Apple 'stole' it and began prototyping it, and Microsoft took it from them and released it first... I could be wrong of course, that's just what I recall reading

Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 9th Jan 2005 13:39
Quote: "now, tell me - is that very fair or logical?"


Of course not, but that's the fault of the people who review the patents If they hired actual computer literates, there wouldn't be this problem.


--[GameBasic - Coming Soon]-- ^^^ banner generously designed by TheBigBabou
Pricey
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Feb 2003
Location:
Posted: 9th Jan 2005 18:29
The Apple Lisa had a GUI before Microsoft

:: 1.8 gHZ AMD Duron :: 256 MB Ram :: 32 MB SiS Graphics ::

:: Current Project: Sea Bound ::
Philip
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Jun 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 9th Jan 2005 23:09
Quote: "Quote: " a lot of stupid sh!t is pattented."

Yes I know that, but a lot of other non-computer related things are patented too."


The problem with patenting software is simply that the patent system was created, and is aimed, at giving monopolistic protection to physical inventions. I stress physical. I speak of material objects such as steam trains, cookers, chairs, etc. Its simply not intended to deal with non-physical things like software. The problem is that the US has allowed its patent system to be abused by the large software writers.

In England the Courts took a much more sensible and robust approach. In the Richardson and IBCOS cases the Courts, having examined the issue in some detail, confirmed that copyright is by far the better means of affording intellectual property law protection to software. Software is much more similar to other literary works such as writing books, etc., than it is to physical mechanisms or devices.

Anyway, whether patents should be extended to software is a much lower issue than the more important issue of whether patents should be extended to genetics. Any number of companies are trying to patent parts of human DNA. I find this as utterly remarkable as it is misconceived. Human DNA cannot possibly be said to be an "invention" of the patenter - each of us and all our forebears have possessed it for aeons. Its a mere discovery, which is certainly not protectable.

However, the US patent system is allowing it to be patented ... very silly ... very very silly ...

Philip

What do you mean, bears aren't supposed to wear hats and a tie? P3.2ghz / 1 gig / GeForce FX 5900 128meg / WinXP home
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 10th Jan 2005 13:09
But wouldn't an ingenious or new, valuable piece of code be more similar to a physical device like a steam train rather than a literary book like Macbeth? Sure the run-of-the-mill, everyday software that anyone and VB could make should not be patentable (which is why they should replace the software patent examiners), but for a legit and smart, inventive way to do something--- that should be patentable. Just like an internal combustion engine is a smart and efficient way to do something that had already been done before.


--[GameBasic - Coming Soon]-- ^^^ banner generously designed by TheBigBabou
adr
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st May 2003
Location: Job Centre
Posted: 10th Jan 2005 17:16 Edited at: 10th Jan 2005 17:18
Quote: "...but for a legit and smart, inventive way to do something--- that should be patentable. Just like an internal combustion engine is a smart and efficient way to do something that had already been done before."


I would argue that your comparison isn't like-with-like. IMO, Windows is the internal combustion engine but the code/software/algorithms is like the cog, or the piston. (Although there probably is an american cog-patent going through the works now) The marketable, salable, consumable result of effort should be patentable -- agreed, but not its basic elements.


If I can't eat it, drink it , **** it or fire it, I'm not interested
Philip
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Jun 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 10th Jan 2005 21:17
In what way is a new or clever bit of code a physical object?

Philip

What do you mean, bears aren't supposed to wear hats and a tie? P3.2ghz / 1 gig / GeForce FX 5900 128meg / WinXP home
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 10th Jan 2005 21:33
The other problem is that, if code was patented, how would you verify whether there was an infringment ? By reverse engineering or disassembly ? Thats not allowed. In addition, it would be possible to get the same result via any number of different ways, which if they do examine the assembly code, it could introduce false positives.

Visit http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~nickk/
I have no signature.
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 11th Jan 2005 02:04 Edited at: 11th Jan 2005 02:05
Quote: " In what way is a new or clever bit of code a physical object?"


I'm not saying it is a physical object, but rather it should be compared to one in the patent world. There's no reason why it shouldn't be patentable much like a steam engine.

Quote: " The other problem is that, if code was patented, how would you verify whether there was an infringment ?"


That would be up to the prosecution lawyers There would first be suspect cases, i.e. a former employee's new startup creating a knock-off version of your company's software, etc.


--[GameBasic - Coming Soon]-- ^^^ banner generously designed by TheBigBabou
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 11th Jan 2005 04:23
But all software is similar...

Visit http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~nickk/
I have no signature.
The Big Babou
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Feb 2003
Location: Cyberspace
Posted: 11th Jan 2005 06:22 Edited at: 11th Jan 2005 06:31
But that clever bit of code is already protected by the copyright. If you copyright your code, doesn't that mean that others may not use or have to pay for that codepiece? so why patent it?

what i found ridiculous is the fact that a decision about the "Software Patent Directive" was to be made in the Agricultural Council. Furthermore was every party in germany against software patents, but the german agricultural minister never said something against this at the eu council.

edit: there was a very good website about software patents, which also had lots of infomation on the patent system. but i can't find it right now.

edit again: here it is: http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/

... they call it a royale with cheese ...
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 11th Jan 2005 07:16 Edited at: 11th Jan 2005 07:16
Quote: " But all software is similar..."


Really? The first spreadsheet program was new at the time, as was the first graphical web browser. Those ideas should have been patented. It's now a famous story about the man who wrote the first spreadsheet program (its name escapes me now) and how he never made a dime from his genius. Quite sad, actually.

Quote: "so why patent it?"


Honestly, for egos and for more protection than copyright. You can't copyright a new idea for a brand new kind of nuclear-heating toaster oven, but you can patent it. Also I would want my name to be remembered as the inventor of so-and-so software.

Maybe instead of being able to patent code, ideas should be patentable. And not an idea with no physical prototype. Perhaps it would be better if the programmer created a working version of his new, never been done before invention, and could patent that, rather than the tricky lines of code used to create it.


--[GameBasic - Coming Soon]-- ^^^ banner generously designed by TheBigBabou
Vai mamar na pila
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Nov 2004
Location: Behind Your Behind
Posted: 11th Jan 2005 11:19 Edited at: 11th Jan 2005 11:25
patents only work has development constrains and to make scroupulos people rich, many times is not one that invents that patents is work, but one who bought him the patent right, has such the company he works for, what is worht that you discover light speed travel if you work for nasa ? then nasa will patent it and can atribute the discover to anyone he wonts (althoug this is not quite like this, its an abstarct comparingson), us started this patent flame war, this way no wonders that us is full of enemies overseas, theyre arrogant has well has tehyre companies, who are they to rule the world ? i dont believe why people allow this junk, why you who live in us dont rebel against your corporate leaders ? to much "brain-wash"

software should not be patentable, only copywriteable off apps, liek windows and linux and others are to the creator company, i dont think the majority of people understand why patenting is,

michael jackson bought the patnet of over 100 beattle songs, is now filthy rich with a 55 million montlhy income because of that, has well all is post generation will be has long has bettle songs play, has the patenable rights pass troguh family eritage real estate.

i dont understand this world, why people let others decide whats good or worng, whats best to ourselfs ? we are the product of millions of years of evolution, we are special becase of our capabilitys and achievements has a hole, not a one, patents stop progress has tehy are conspicious ways of getting rich,

teh problem of this wourld is that people think they will live forever, and afterlife, we are nothing more thaan a lifeform, althoug unique, we are bound to die form teh moment we are born, what is worth fame? recognition is worth, not fame, help the ones that will come next has the ones before left us with a legacy, i just pity myself for not being here when eventually all humans will disiapper, i woudl like to be the last one, just to prove im right, then, i would believe it was worth to be born, im angry to this world, because teh passivity of other makes me angry, why should we bowl beneath one not different then me, one just human, if i was to choose to live forevere or to die and never be awere of my existence i would second choose, dammm, my biggest wich would be to one day be ablle to talk to the world, maybe i could make a difference with all the thinks i have to say, this patenting stuff really pisses me off !!!

anyways, im deviating, couldnt help it, myght has well push the "post" button after writing all this...dammm

[edit] i apologyze for my bad english

changed name recently, remain the same, a.k.a sandra
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 11th Jan 2005 12:14
Quote: " us started this patent flame war, this way no wonders that us is full of enemies overseas, theyre arrogant has well has tehyre companies"


Heeyyy now... I'm not American, but be careful of the stereotypes...

Quote: "michael jackson bought the patnet of over 100 beattle songs, is now filthy rich with a 55 million montlhy income because of that, has well all is post generation will be has long has bettle songs play, has the patenable rights pass troguh family eritage real estate."


I've never heard this, and I'm a huge Beatles fan. For one thing, songs are not "patentable". They do have copyright, but one thing's for sure--- the Beatles would not sell those off. Their copyright lasts, I believe, 50-70 years after their death. This will surely support all their descendents down several generations

Quote: "we are the product of millions of years of evolution, we are special becase of our capabilitys and achievements has a hole, not a one, patents stop progress has tehy are conspicious ways of getting rich,"


Sounds like you have an issue with rewarding inventiveness with money. If there were no monetary value for putting in creative thought, nobody would do it! I'm sorry, but I'd rather have my head out of the clouds and my feet on the ground.

If they remove the ability to patent software, then they need to remove the ability to patent physical objects.


--[GameBasic - Coming Soon]-- ^^^ banner generously designed by TheBigBabou
Vai mamar na pila
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Nov 2004
Location: Behind Your Behind
Posted: 11th Jan 2005 19:54
Quote: "If they remove the ability to patent software, then they need to remove the ability to patent physical objects."


i know sometimes i dream to much, but software should be open-source as well has many other stuff, remember that there are a lot of cientif brains out there that dont have the oportunity to get their hands dirty in stuff tehy are the best because teh info is just not there, the corporate machines swallow them all, and your only choice is to have acess to alitle of information if you work for those, while you could do much better alone or in conjuntion with tohers alike, patenting software is bad, its silly, how can you patent future stuff to come like hrdi rendering ! its like if you patent real time lighting, that beatlle stuff is much true, ill find the url and post it here.

changed name recently, remain the same, a.k.a sandra
OSX Using Happy Dude
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2003
Location: At home
Posted: 11th Jan 2005 19:56 Edited at: 11th Jan 2005 19:57
Quote: "Those ideas should have been patented"

No, because then there would have been no alternatives.

Visit http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~nickk/
I have no signature.
blanky
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Aug 2004
Location: ./
Posted: 12th Jan 2005 02:03 Edited at: 12th Jan 2005 02:05
If software patents are going to go through, the decline of open-source software, and soon humanity is near...

See if I'm right by 2015...



(Edit: What if SGI or w/e they are try to patent something out of Linux, still claiming it's stolen code?)

2005 - Year of cartoony red cubes (look! black outline!), for me at least.

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-09-23 08:20:53
Your offset time is: 2024-09-23 08:20:53