diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'examples/blog/articles/scrap1_24.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | examples/blog/articles/scrap1_24.html | 102 |
1 files changed, 36 insertions, 66 deletions
diff --git a/examples/blog/articles/scrap1_24.html b/examples/blog/articles/scrap1_24.html index dac7ef7a..9b6a79a1 100644 --- a/examples/blog/articles/scrap1_24.html +++ b/examples/blog/articles/scrap1_24.html @@ -1,6 +1,5 @@ <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/loose.dtd"> -<html> -<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman. +<html><!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman. Free Software Foundation @@ -20,8 +19,7 @@ ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9 Cover design by Rob Myers. Cover photograph by Peter Hinely. - --> -<!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82 + --><!-- Created on February 18, 2016 by texi2html 1.82 texi2html was written by: Lionel Cons <Lionel.Cons@cern.ch> (original author) Karl Berry <karl@freefriends.org> @@ -29,17 +27,7 @@ texi2html was written by: and many others. Maintained by: Many creative people. Send bugs and suggestions to <texi2html-bug@nongnu.org> ---> -<head> -<title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 24. Software Patents and Literary Patents</title> - -<meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."> -<meta name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 24. Software Patents and Literary Patents"> -<meta name="resource-type" content="document"> -<meta name="distribution" content="global"> -<meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"> -<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"> -<style type="text/css"> +--><head><title>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 24. Software Patents and Literary Patents</title><meta name="description" content="This is the second edition of Richard Stallman's collection of essays."><meta name="keywords" content="Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.: 24. Software Patents and Literary Patents"><meta name="resource-type" content="document"><meta name="distribution" content="global"><meta name="Generator" content="texi2html 1.82"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><style type="text/css"> <!-- a.summary-letter {text-decoration: none} blockquote.smallquotation {font-size: smaller} @@ -55,16 +43,10 @@ span.roman {font-family:serif; font-weight:normal;} span.sansserif {font-family:sans-serif; font-weight:normal;} ul.toc {list-style: none} --> -</style> -<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../style.css"> - - -</head> - -<body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000"> +</style><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../style.css"></head><body lang="en" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080" alink="#FF0000"> <a name="SPLP"></a> -<header><div id="logo"><img src="../gnu.svg" height="100" width="100"></div><h1>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Software-Patents-and-Literary-Patents"></a> +<header><div id="logo"><a href="/"><img src="../gnu.svg" height="100" width="100"></a></div><h1>Free Software, Free Society, 2nd ed.</h1></header><section id="main"><a name="Software-Patents-and-Literary-Patents"></a> <h1 class="chapter"> 24. Software Patents and Literary Patents </h1> <a name="index-patents_002c-analogy-between-literary-and-software"></a> @@ -72,9 +54,9 @@ ul.toc {list-style: none} <a name="index-patents_002c-proposed-European-Union-software-patents-directive-1"></a> <a name="index-European-Union_002c-proposed-European-Union-software-patents-directive-1"></a> <p>When politicians consider the question of software patents, they are -usually voting blind; not being programmers, they don’t understand +usually voting blind; not being programmers, they don’t understand what software patents really do. They often think patents are similar -to copyright law (“except for some details”)—which +to copyright law (“except for some details”)—which is not the case. For instance, when I publicly asked <a name="index-Devedjian_002c-Minister-Patrick"></a> Patrick @@ -84,7 +66,7 @@ France, how France would vote on the issue of software patents, Devedjian responded with an impassioned defense of copyright law, praising Victor Hugo for his role in the adoption of copyright. (The misleading -term “intellectual property” promotes this confusion—one of the reasons it +term “intellectual property” promotes this confusion—one of the reasons it should never be used.) </p> <p>Those who imagine effects like those of copyright law cannot grasp the @@ -92,28 +74,27 @@ disastrous effects of software patents. We can use Victor Hugo as an example to illustrate the difference. </p> <p>A novel and a modern complex program have certain points in common: -each one is large, and implements many ideas in combination. So let’s +each one is large, and implements many ideas in combination. So let’s follow the analogy, and suppose that patent law had been applied to novels in the 1800s; suppose that states such as France had permitted the patenting of literary ideas. How would this have affected Victor -Hugo’s writing? How would the effects of literary patents compare +Hugo’s writing? How would the effects of literary patents compare with the effects of literary copyright? </p> <a name="index-Les-Miserables_002c-Victor-Hugo"></a> -<p>Consider Victor Hugo’s novel <cite>Les Misérables.</cite> Since he +<p>Consider Victor Hugo’s novel <cite>Les Misérables.</cite> Since he wrote it, the copyright belonged only to him. He did not have to fear that some stranger could sue him for copyright infringement and win. That was impossible, because copyright covers only the details of a work of authorship, not the ideas embodied in them, and it only restricts copying. Hugo had not copied <cite>Les -Misérables,</cite> so he was not in danger from copyright. +Misérables,</cite> so he was not in danger from copyright. </p> <p>Patents work differently. Patents cover ideas; each patent is a monopoly on practicing some idea, which is described in the patent -itself. Here’s one example of a hypothetical literary patent: +itself. Here’s one example of a hypothetical literary patent: </p> -<ul> -<li> +<ul><li> Claim 1: a communication process that represents in the mind of a reader the concept of a character who has been in jail for a long time and becomes bitter towards society and humankind. </li><li> @@ -122,62 +103,55 @@ Claim 2: a communication process according to claim 1, wherein said character su </li><li> Claim 3: a communication process according to claims 1 and 2, wherein said character changes his name during the story. -</li></ul> -<a name="index-Valjean_002c-literary-character-Jean-_0028see-also-Les-Miserables_0029"></a> -<p>If such a patent had existed in 1862 when <cite>Les Misérables</cite> was +</li></ul><a name="index-Valjean_002c-literary-character-Jean-_0028see-also-Les-Miserables_0029"></a> +<p>If such a patent had existed in 1862 when <cite>Les Misérables</cite> was published, the novel would have conflicted with all three claims, since all these things happened to Jean Valjean in the novel. Victor Hugo could have been sued, and if sued, he would have lost. The novel -could have been prohibited—in effect, censored—by the +could have been prohibited—in effect, censored—by the patent holder. </p> <p>Now consider this hypothetical literary patent: </p> -<ul> -<li> Claim 1: a communication process that represents in the mind of a reader the concept of a character who has been in jail for a long time and subsequently changes his name. -</li></ul> -<p><cite>Les Misérables</cite> would have been prohibited by that patent too, +<ul><li> Claim 1: a communication process that represents in the mind of a reader the concept of a character who has been in jail for a long time and subsequently changes his name. +</li></ul><p><cite>Les Misérables</cite> would have been prohibited by that patent too, because this description too fits the life story of Jean Valjean. And -here’s another hypothetical patent: +here’s another hypothetical patent: </p> -<ul> -<li> +<ul><li> Claim 1: a communication process that represents in the mind of a reader the concept of a character who finds moral redemption and then changes his name. -</li></ul> -<p>Jean Valjean would have been forbidden by this patent too. +</li></ul><p>Jean Valjean would have been forbidden by this patent too. </p> <p>All three patents would cover, and prohibit, the life story of this one character. They overlap, but they do not precisely duplicate each other, so they could all be valid simultaneously; all three patent holders could have sued Victor Hugo. Any one of them could have prohibited -publication of <cite>Les Misérables.</cite> +publication of <cite>Les Misérables.</cite> </p> <p>This patent also could have been violated: </p> -<ul> -<li> +<ul><li> Claim 1: a communication process that presents a character whose given name matches the last syllable of his family name. -</li></ul> -<p>through the name “Jean Valjean,” but at least this patent +</li></ul><p>through the name “Jean Valjean,” but at least this patent would have been easy to avoid. </p> <p>You might think that these ideas are so simple that no patent office would have issued them. We programmers are often amazed by the -simplicity of the ideas that real software patents cover—for +simplicity of the ideas that real software patents cover—for instance, the <a name="index-European-Patent-Office"></a> European Patent Office has issued a patent on the progress bar, and a patent on accepting payment via credit cards. These patents would be laughable if they were not so dangerous. </p> -<p>Other aspects of <cite>Les Misérables</cite> could also have +<p>Other aspects of <cite>Les Misérables</cite> could also have run afoul of patents. For instance, there could have been a patent on a fictionalized portrayal of the Battle of Waterloo, or a patent on using Parisian slang in fiction. Two more lawsuits. In fact, there is no limit to the number of different patents that might have been applicable for suing the author of a work such as <cite>Les -Misérables.</cite> All the patent holders would say they deserved a +Misérables.</cite> All the patent holders would say they deserved a reward for the literary progress that their patented ideas represent, but these obstacles would not promote progress in literature, they would only obstruct it. @@ -186,8 +160,7 @@ would only obstruct it. irrelevant. Imagine a patent with broad claims like these: </p> -<ul> -<li> +<ul><li> A communication process structured with narration that continues through many pages. @@ -205,13 +178,12 @@ Narration that presents many layers of society. </li><li> Narration that shows the wheels of hidden conspiracy. -</li></ul> -<p>Who would the patent holders have been? They could have been +</li></ul><p>Who would the patent holders have been? They could have been other novelists, perhaps Dumas or Balzac, who had written such -novels—but not necessarily. It isn’t required to write a +novels—but not necessarily. It isn’t required to write a program to patent a software idea, so if our hypothetical literary patents follow the real patent system, these patent holders would not -have had to write novels, or stories, or anything—except patent +have had to write novels, or stories, or anything—except patent applications. Patent parasite companies, businesses that produce nothing except threats and lawsuits, are booming nowadays. </p> @@ -227,7 +199,7 @@ writing a novel of this kind. do. Software patents cover features, such as defining abbreviations in a word processor, or natural order recalculation in a spreadsheet. Patents cover algorithms that programs need to use. Patents cover -aspects of file formats, such as Microsoft’s +aspects of file formats, such as Microsoft’s <a name="index-Microsoft_002c-OOXML-format-_0028see-also-patents_0029"></a> OOXML format. <a name="index-MPEG_002d2"></a> @@ -251,13 +223,11 @@ of the whole system could be sued under? </p> <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-do-not-authorize-software-patents"></a> <p>The way to prevent software patents from bollixing software -development is simple: don’t authorize them. This ought to be easy, +development is simple: don’t authorize them. This ought to be easy, since most patent laws have provisions against software patents. They -typically say that “software per se” cannot be patented. +typically say that “software per se” cannot be patented. But patent offices around the world are trying to twist the words and issuing patents on the ideas implemented in programs. Unless this is blocked, the result will be to put all software developers in danger. <a name="index-patents_002c-analogy-between-literary-and-software-1"></a> -</p><hr size="2"> -</body> -</html> +</p><hr size="2"></section></body></html> |