---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: 2003-10-21 18:54:35 +0100 From: James Heald j.heald@ucl.ac.uk Subject: [Fsfe-uk] Fwd: [SWPAT] EU patent officials meeting this week. Letters needed *now*.

Below is (very slightly revised) an email alert sent out to FFII supporters.

Faxes sent to MPs today/tonight could be particularly important (especially if the local MP is a Lib Dem). Use www.faxyourmp.com

Please forward this alert at will to any mailing lists where it has not already been posted.

--------------------------------------------------------------------- [SWPAT] EU patent officials meeting this week. Letters needed *now*. A web version can be found at http://www.ffii.org.uk/council.html

Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure UK

Dear Supporter[1],

In September the European Parliament voted[2] for strong restrictions[3] on software patentability, after having heard powerful arguments from economists[4], scientists[5], small business associations[6] and MEPs[7] that software patents would be bad for e-commerce[8], bad for small businesses[9], and bad for innovation[10].

But this vote is in danger of being set aside[11] at a meeting of the EU's Competitiveness Council of Ministers[12] on 10 November. The ministers' meeting is to be "negotiated" at a meeting of senior patent officials[13] from across Europe even sooner: this Thursday 23 October.

If UK ministers cannot be convinced otherwise before 10 November, it is believed they will push for the Council to adopt a November 2002 draft text[14], which is even worse than the infamous McCarthy report[15]. The European Parliament's rules for second reading make it very difficult for MEPs to fix a bad text from the Council.

So far UK ministers have been sleepwalking, automatically following a Patent Office script. The FFII is therefore calling for all supporters to contact their local MPs, as soon as possible. We have until 10 November at the latest to wake up UK ministers up the dangers of software patents. If at all possible we need to try to make an impact before this Thursday.

It could be our last good chance to stop software patents in Europe.

Every letter could be the one which tips the balance.

Every letter counts.

Best regards,

Software Patents Workgroup, FFII-UK

Supporters elsewhere in Europe may like to look at this page at FFII[16] for information on who to contact, and what else can be done.

Know your stuff:

* How important is the Council of Ministers? * What is the UK position? * Are software patents good for software developers? * What does the minister need to know? * Who to contact * How to be effective * How to stay in touch

How important is the Council of Ministers?

VERY. The European Parliament's rules for second reading make it far more difficult for MEPs to fix a bad text from the Council, because any amendments need an absolute majority[17] of all of the 623 elected MEPs -- ie usually far more than 50% of those actually voting in the chamber.

What is the UK position?

UK policy has so far been led by the UK Patent Office[18]. The UKPO has been particularly active in lobbying[19] for unlimited patentability and is unlikely to support a platform which is acceptable to anyone except the patent industry.

Unless they can be convinced otherwise, UK Government ministers are being led by UKPO officials to support the November 2002 draft[20] drawn up by patent offices across Europe. The Nov 2002 version actively supports software patenting, unlike the September 2003 European Parliament text[21].

Replies from ministers[22] are claiming that the UK Patent Office's consultation[23] 3 years ago produced results which were "broadly in favour" of the UKPO position. In fact, the views[24] of software professionals (as opposed to patent professionals) were overwhelmingly against software patents.

Are software patents good for software developers?

NO. "Software patents are like landmines for programmers. At each design decision, there is a chance you will step on a patent and it will destroy your project. Considering the large number of ideas that must be combined in a modern program, the danger becomes very large." -- Richard Stallman, founder of the GNU project.

Supporters of e-patents often make the simple equation patents ==innovation == growth. One of the most interesting articles to rebut this is "e-Patents and financial investing"[25] by Laura Creighton, a software venture capitalist. It explains why software patents are not necessary, nor usually even helpful, and give surprisingly little real protection.

Software patents are bad for e-commerce[26], bad for small businesses[27] and bad for innovation[28]. That is why leading economists[29], scientists[30], small business associations[31], and MEPs[32] all urged the European Parliament to vote against software patents.

What does the minister needs to know?

* Our central request is for the the Council of Ministers not to adopt its draft November 2002 text[33] unamended, but instead to substantially revise it, adopting and building on the Parliament amendments.

* Most importantly, we need to convince the Government that software patents are a bad idea. Ministers should not just follow the advice of the UK Patent Office (UKPO) uncritically. Currently UKPO are both judge and jury, and about as likely to campaign for real limits on software patents as turkeys are to vote for Christmas. Ministers must be challenged to consider for themselves what is really in the best interests of the UK software industry and all UK computer users.

* Free software is directly threatened[34] by software patents. But it is essential that the campaign against software patents is not just "special pleading" by supporters of Open Source--"free-love, open-standard, freeware fanatics" according to one patent lawyer. The entire industry would be damaged by patenting and litigation. If you write about free software, please make clear how important it is to the whole software industry and commercial end-users.

* The directive claims to allow the patenting of new "technical" devices, but not the patenting of "generic pure software". But the EPO regards almost any software innovation as technical[35]. Without an explicit definition, European Courts will be forced to follow the EPO doctrine. The European Parliament's most important amendment is its new very clear definition of what is and what is not "technical".

* The November 2002 draft also makes abstract data processing a field of technology[36]; has no article 6a to allow interoperability[37] -- and it would allow program claims[38], so that just discussing code on a website can be a direct patent infringement. Ministers must re-open the November 2002 text. Every letter counts.

Who to contact

* WRITE to your local MP as soon as possible with your concerns about software patents, and ask your MP to bring them to the attention of Stephen Timms MP[39], the minister for e-commerce at the DTI.

* BY ASKING your local MP to forward your concerns, you should get a reply personally signed by the minister. You could of course just write to the minister directly; but if you do, you will just receive a standard civil service reply, and the minister will never see it.

* FIND your local MPs by typing your postcode in www.faxyourmp.com Then WRITE to your MP at:

Name of MP, House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA

* COPY your letters to uk-parl-sent @ ffii.org.uk, and replies to uk-parl-replies @ ffii.org.uk

You should only write to your own local MP. You may also wish to send a blind copy of your letter to [40]Richard Mulcahy at the Patent Office.

How to be effective

* DO: make your letter personal. Explain who you are, how this issue affects you, and why it matters to you.

* DON'T: write the same as everybody else. MPs ignore form letters. Decide which is the most logical or important starting point for you, and then bring in other points around that.

* IF you are: + a small business: tell your MP why and how a rush to software patents would afftect your business. Be sure to mention your turnover and number of employees -- real money and real jobs are at stake. + a user of software: tell your MP what makes you afraid of monopolisation and loss of choice. + a member of a political party, a trade union, a university, a consumer organisation, a business association, or any other sort of organised body: think how you can mobilise your organisation to make its voice heard. + a consultant: explain to your clients - and the MP - why software patents will make it harder for you to solve their problems.

* DO: be polite, reasonable and well-informed (insane abuse doesn't help). Be focussed and to the point. If your letter is very long, write a short one-page executive summary bulletting the main points, and use it as a covering letter to introduce the full brain dump.

* DO: spread the word. There is very little time, and we need to make a huge impact. So unless you want to see legislation for unlimited patentability, pass the message on to other people. Encourage them to write.

How to stay in touch

* Join the FFII list of supporters[41] * Sign the Eurolinux petition[42] against software patents. * If you want to do more, or to keep in touch with the campaign daily, join the ffii-uk email list at ffii.org.uk - further instructions on the FFII-UK main page[43]. _________________________________________________________________

References

1. You have been sent this email because you have expressed concern about software patents in Europe, either by signing the Eurolinux Petition http://noepatents.org and/or the FFII Call for Action http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/eubsa-swpat0202/demands/ We intend to use these lists very occasionally, to send updates and information alerts on the progress of the software patent directive through the European system. Such messages will have [SWPAT] as the first word in their subject lines.

If you would prefer not to receive any more such messages, please send a reply to this email with the subject line "Remove". Thank you for your support.

2. http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/legal/0,39020651,39116642,00.htm 3. http://swpat.ffii.org/journal/03/fsfr1010/index.en.html 4. http://www.researchineurope.org/policy/patentdirltr.htm 5. http://www.greens-efa.org/pdf/documents/SoftwarePatenting/petitiontoEP_EN.pd... 6. http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/eubsa-swpat0202/ceapme0309/index.en.html 7. http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/eubsa-swpat0202/plen0309/deba/#framm 8. http://elis.ugent.be/~jmaebe/swpat/why.html#ecommerce 9. http://elis.ugent.be/~jmaebe/swpat/why.html#developers 10. http://elis.ugent.be/~jmaebe/swpat/why.html#innovation 11. http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/legal/0,39020651,39116709,00.htm 12. http://wiki.ael.be/index.php/CouncilOfMinisters 13. http://register.consilium.eu.int/scripts/utfregisterDir/WebDriver.exe?MIval=... 14. http://www.ffii.org.uk/nov2002.html 15. http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/eubsa-swpat0202/amccarthy0302/index.en.html 16. http://swpat.ffii.org/group/todo/index.en.html 17. http://www2.europarl.eu.int/omk/sipade2?PUBREF=-//EP//TEXT+RULES-EP+20030201... 18. http://www.patent.gov.uk/about/ippd/issues/softpat.htm 19. http://swpat.ffii.org//players/uk/index.en.html 20. http://www.ffii.org.uk/nov2002.html 21. http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/europarl0309/ 22. http://www.ffii.org.uk/hewitt.html 23. http://www.patent.gov.uk/about/consultations/conclusions.htm 24. http://www.patent.gov.uk/about/consultations/responses/comsoft/index.htm 25. http://www.vrijschrift.org/swpat/030508_1/ 26. http://elis.ugent.be/~jmaebe/swpat/why.html#ecommerce 27. http://elis.ugent.be/~jmaebe/swpat/why.html#developers 28. http://elis.ugent.be/~jmaebe/swpat/why.html#innovation 29. http://www.researchineurope.org/policy/patentdirltr.htm 30. http://www.greens-efa.org/pdf/documents/SoftwarePatenting/petitiontoEP_EN.pd... 31. http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/eubsa-swpat0202/ceapme0309/index.en.html 32. http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/eubsa-swpat0202/plen0309/deba/#framm 33. http://www.ffii.org.uk/nov2002.html 34. http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/stallman-patents.html 35. http://www.ffii.org.uk/technical.html 36. http://www.ffii.org.uk/fields_of_tech.html 37. http://www.ffii.org.uk/interop.html 38. http://www.ffii.org.uk/program_claims.html 39. http://www.dti.gov.uk/ministers/ministers/timms.html 40. http://www.patent.gov.uk/about/ippd/issues/softpat.htm 41. http://aktiv.ffii.org/?l=en 42. http://petition.eurolinux.org/index_html?LANG=en 43. http://www.ffii.org.uk/index.html

_______________________________________________ Fsfe-uk mailing list Fsfe-uk@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fsfe-uk