|
Förening för en fri
informationsinfrastruktur |
login |
From: Michael Widenius [monty@mysql.com]
Sent: mardi 5 décembre 2000 4:14
To: MARKT SOFTPAT
Subject: Patents
Hi!
I write this mail based on your requested on the following page:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/intprop/indprop/softpaten.htm
You are free to use any of the following comments any way you want
(including using my name)
My name is Michael Widenius and I am moderator for MySQL, one of the
biggest Open Source applications from Europe (the biggest one is
Linux). I have been developing software for the last 20 years and I
have written about 95 % of the MySQL server.
We have about 2,000,000 installations of MySQL worldwide (of which
half is in USA). We at MySQL AB take a very strong stand against
patents as the US patent system already has shown that patents on
computer programs doesn't work. Software patents prevent competition
and make life harder for small and medium size companies.
Assuming Europe takes up patents in a similar way as the USA, you will
soon run into the following problems:
- The patent offices are not capable to see if a patent is truly
a new invention or something that is trivial for someone that is in
the particular field.
- A patent doesn't protect a product, as it's impossible to write any
big complicated piece of code (experts estimates about 10,000 lines)
without conflicting with a patent. Even if you have a patent,
someone else can very easily ensure that you will never be able to
deliver the product to the end costumer.
- For small software companies it's impossible to guard that they are
not accidently using a patent; If someone sues them for using a
patent, they can't afford to defend themself but the only option is
to go out of business. A big company can using patents force new
companies out of business, just by accusing them of using a patent.
- Programs will be much more expensive for the end customer as
it will be much more expensive to produce software. A current
estimate is that it will be at least 30 % more expensive
to guard against other patents.
- The notion that you can defend yourself by having patents against
someone else doesn't work if the other part doesn't need your patents.
It's also doesn't work against companies that doesn't have a
product, but only takes obvious patents to force other people to
pay.
- All software programs will have to work and look differently
(because look-and-feel patents); This means that if a big
company can ensure that their customers can't easily move between
products as they have to re-train themself if they want to do that.
- Even if you get a patent for a software program, it's almost
impossible to use it as you in most cases can't know if someone else
is using it; The only programs you can check for patents are Open
Source programs, but this is only useful for big companies that
wants to kill off Open Source solutions.
- Open source programs like Linux and MySQL, which makes lives easier
for ten of millions of people can much easier be stopped by
using patents; Open source programs are in a very bad position
because anyone can check what algorithms are used; Even if all code
are self-invented, it's very likely that you are depending on some
known axioms for which someone has been granted a patent.
- Very few companies has got rich on patents; All big widespread
innovation in the software market (like the Internet, word
processors, web browsers, spreadsheets) have been made possible just
because the idea wasn't patented.
- It's very likely that if we change so that one can get software
patents in Europe that USA will force Europe to accept all the
software patents that the USA Patent Office has accepted in the USA.
If this happens, we may in Europe be forced to pay for patent
infringements if we want to:
- Sell something over the internet.
- Use hyperlinks on our web pages
- Have a database as a backend for a web page
Other comments:
The time until a patent expires is way too long; If the idea of a
patent is only to give the company a competitive edge, then a patent
for 2-3 years would be more than enough for this (in the software
business).
Almost all well known software developers agree that patents are
harmful and that copyright offer enough protection to satisfy their
needs. (More about this at: http://www.freepatents.org/against/ )
The major argument I have heard for software patents is that if you
plan to merge your company with a big USA based company and they have a
lot of patents, and you don't, then your company will be regarded as
having less value. The easy solution for this is to just apply for
the patent in USA. You can also ensure your position in USA by
applying for your patents there; Europe doesn't need to allow software
patents because of this!
If we here in Europe can work without software patents, we will have a
big competitive edge against business in USA. While they spend their
money on keeping their attorneys happy, we can instead spend our money
on developing better software.
Software patents are only good for big companies that have a lot of
money and can defend themself. For the major part of the industry
software patents are however very harmful.
It's ridiculous that someone can get a patent for something that you
can easily come up with yourself, independent of the patent. If we
are going to allow patents on computer programs, then we should also
allow this for ideas in literature, like murdering someone with a
drumstick. Most computer programmers agrees that writing a program is
very similar to writing a book and if one can get a patent for a
program, one should also be allowed to get this for a book, an email
or a way to express oneself in speech!
As the above is very hard to do in practice, I propose that
there should be no patents for any software ideas, user interfaces,
standards or interoperability. The current copyright laws for
the actual software code are good enough!
Regards,
Michael "Monty" Widenius
MySQL moderator
ffii-se på twitter