Content deleted Content added
m Fix broken link. |
rm dead pov tag: no extant dispute |
||
| (12 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown) | |||
Line 4:
{{fanpov|date=October 2014}}
{{lead rewrite|date=October 2014}}
}}
{{Computer programs, software and patent law}}
Opposition to [[software patents]] is widespread in the [[free software community]].
==Positions from the community==
Community leaders such as [[Richard Stallman]],<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.ifso.ie/documents/rms-2004-05-24.html
Line 22 ⟶ 20:
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081229064859/http://www.linuxformat.co.uk/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=15#patents
|url-status=dead
}}</ref> [[Bruce Perens]],<ref>[http://perens.com/Articles/Patents.html /home/bruce/Patents.html<!-- Bot generated title -->] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070305130408/http://perens.com/Articles/Patents.html |date=2007-03-05 }}</ref> and [[Linus Torvalds]];<ref>{{cite web
|url=http://linux-foundation.org/weblogs/openvoices/linus-torvalds-part-ii/
|title=Linux Foundation Interview with Linus Torvalds, mostly talking about software patents
|access-date=2008-02-06
|archive-date=2008-02-05
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080205205849/http://linux-foundation.org/weblogs/openvoices/linus-torvalds-part-ii/
|url-status=dead
}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.effi.org/patentit/patents_torvalds_cox.html
|title=Open Letter on Software Patents from Linux developers
|access-date=2007-03-10
}}</ref> and companies such as [[Red Hat]],<ref>[http://www.redhat.com/legal/patent_policy.html redhat.com | Red Hat Patent Policy<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> and [[MySQL]],<ref>[http://www.mysql.com/company/legal/patents.html MySQL AB :: MySQL Public Patent Policy<!-- Bot generated title -->] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080705175742/http://www.mysql.com/company/legal/patents.html |date=2008-07-05 }}</ref> and community groups such as [[Free Software Foundation Europe|FSFE]],<ref>[http://fsfeurope.org/projects/swpat/ FSFE - Software Patents in Europe<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> [[Irish Free Software Organisation|IFSO]],<ref>[http://ifso.ie/projects/swpats.html Software Patentability & EU Directive COD/2002/0047<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> all believe that patents cause problems for free software.▼
|archive-date=2011-07-20
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110720010536/http://www.effi.org/patentit/patents_torvalds_cox.html
|url-status=dead
▲}}</ref>
==Patent licensing==
Leading open-source figures and companies<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/66807|title = Red Hat urges patent office to deny most software patents|date = 29 September 2010}}</ref> have complained that software patents are overly broad and the [[USPTO]] should reject most of them. [[Bill Gates]] has said "If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today’s ideas were invented, and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today".<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://news.swpat.org/2010/06/late-comers-guide-what-is-bilski-anyway/|title=Late-comers guide: What is Bilski anyway? – End Software Patents|date=28 June 2010 }}</ref>▼
▲Leading open-source figures and companies<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/66807|title = Red Hat urges patent office to deny most software patents|date = 29 September 2010}}</ref> have complained that software patents are overly broad and the [[USPTO]] should reject most of them. [[Bill Gates]] has said "If people had understood how patents would be granted when most of today’s ideas were invented, and had taken out patents, the industry would be at a complete standstill today".<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://news.swpat.org/2010/06/late-comers-guide-what-is-bilski-anyway/|title=Late-comers guide: What is Bilski anyway? – End Software Patents}}</ref>
==Problems for free software==
Line 64 ⟶ 69:
not yet court-validated software patents that, if upheld as valid by the
courts, could potentially be used to support patent claims against Linux.
</blockquote>However, [[Mark Webbink]], who was Red Hat's Deputy General Counsel, said that Ravicher did not deduce the kernel to infringe any of said patents.<ref>{{Cite web|
==Techniques for opposing patents==
Line 71 ⟶ 76:
"Patent retaliation" clauses are included in several [[free software licenses]]. The goal of these clauses is to create a penalty so as to discourage the licensee (the user/recipient of the software) from suing the licensor (the provider/author of the software) for [[patent infringement]] by terminating the license upon the initiation of such a lawsuit.
|title=Richard Stallman speaking about GPLv3 in April 2007
|url=https://fsfe.org/activities/gplv3/brussels-rms-transcript.en.html#retaliation}}</ref> The final published version of GPLv3 contains a patent retaliation clause similar to those in the [[Apache License]] and [[Mozilla Public License]], which terminates rights granted by the license in response to litigation alleging patent infringement in the software.<ref>{{cite web |website=GNU Project |publisher=Free Software Foundation |url=https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#v3PatentRetaliation |title=GPL FAQ: Does GPLv3 have a 'patent retaliation clause'?}}</ref>
===Patent pools===
Line 151 ⟶ 153:
==Infringement claims==
[[Microsoft]] has claimed that [[free software]] such as [[OpenOffice.org]] and the [[Linux kernel]] violate 235 Microsoft patents and said that it will seek licence fees,<ref>{{cite web |last=Parloff |first=Roger |date=2007-05-14 |title=Microsoft takes on the free world |url=https://fortune.com/2007/05/28/microsoft-linux-intellectual-property/ |access-date=2022-12-17 |publisher=[[Fortune (magazine)|Fortune]]}}</ref> but has so far failed to disclose which patents they may violate. However, the [[Microsoft v. TomTom|2009 lawsuit]] against TomTom involved the use of Microsoft's patents for long filenames on FAT filesystems, the code for which was in the Linux kernel, not in any TomTom-developed software.<ref>{{cite web
| url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-10173126-75.html | title=Open-source leaders see Microsoft-TomTom suit as a threat
| publisher=[[CNet]]
| date=2009-02-26
| last=Mills
| first=Elinor | access-date=2010-06-10
| archive-date=2011-06-17
| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110617024457/http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-10173126-75.html
| url-status=dead
}}</ref> The Linux kernel developers subsequently worked around it.<ref>See the kernel option VFAT_FS_DUALNAMES</ref>
Line 163 ⟶ 171:
|url=http://www.linuxworld.com/news/2008/012908-barracuda.html
|title=Barracuda turns to open source users for patent research
|access-date=2008-01-30
|archive-date=2008-01-31
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080131212827/http://www.linuxworld.com/news/2008/012908-barracuda.html
|url-status=dead
}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
|url=http://www.barracudanetworks.com/ns/legal/
|title=Legal Defense of Free and Open Source Software
|publisher=Barracuda Networks
|access-date=2008-01-30
|archive-date=2008-01-31
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080131140440/http://www.barracudanetworks.com/ns/legal/
|url-status=dead
}}</ref>
Line 196 ⟶ 212:
|work=here be dragons
|quote=We have declined to discuss any agreement with Microsoft under the threat of unspecified patent infringements.
}}</ref> as have [[Red Hat]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.zdnet.com.au/ubuntu-red-hat-reject-microsoft-patent-deal-339278741.htm |title=Ubuntu, Red Hat reject Microsoft patent deal |url-status=
|url=http://corp.mandriva.com/webteam/2007/06/19/we-will-not-go-to-canossa/
|title=We will not go to Canossa
Line 205 ⟶ 221:
| url=http://blogs.zdnet.com/Berlind/?p=833&tag=nl.e622
| title=First patent suit against Linux has a Kevin Bacon-esque connection to Microsoft
| quote=''LLC is a subsidiary of Acacia Research Corporation... This past July Acacia hired Jonathan Taub away from his job as Director, Strategic Alliances for the Mobile and Embedded Devices (MED) division at Microsoft and then, just last week, it hired Brad Brunell away from his job at Microsoft where, among other jobs, he served as General Manager, Intellectual Property Licensing.''
| last=Berlind
| first=David | publisher=zdnet
| date=2007-10-11
| access-date=2007-10-12
| archive-date=2007-10-24
| archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071024002116/http://blogs.zdnet.com/Berlind/?p=833&tag=nl.e622
| url-status=dead
}}</ref><ref name="LLCsuitegroklaw">{{cite web
| url=http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071011205044141
| title=Patent Infringement Lawsuit Filed Against Red Hat & Novell - Just Like Ballmer Predicted
|publisher=groklaw
| date=2007-10-11
| access-date=2007-10-12}}</ref><ref>The U.S. patent 5,072,412 concerns the desktop User Interface, see [https://
|url = http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS2013674721.html
|archive-url = https://archive.today/20130103223944/http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS2013674721.html
Line 222 ⟶ 243:
|date = 2007-08-12
|access-date = 2009-12-07
}}</ref> and commentators suspect a strong connection between this company and Microsoft.<ref name="LLCsuitezdnet" /><ref name="LLCsuitegroklaw" /> In 2010, IP Innovation lost the suit.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Red Hat & Novell Beat IP Innovation and in Marshall, Texas, too | url = http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20100430223358785 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100611210642/http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20100430223358785 |archive-date=11 June 2010 |publisher=Groklaw |date=30 April 2010 | access-date = 5 July 2013 }}</ref>
In December 2007, Microsoft granted [[Samba (software)|the Samba project]] access to certain proprietary documents and must maintain a list of related patents for a one-time fee of 10,000 Euros.<ref>{{cite web
Line 249 ⟶ 270:
{{DEFAULTSORT:Software Patents And Free Software}}
[[Category:Software patent law]]
[[Category:Free software culture and documents|Patents]]
| |||