From: Nilgün Belma Bugüner (nilgun@superonline.com)
Date: Mon 15 Sep 2003 - 12:58:57 EDT
Selam,
Bu yazılım patenti olayı gerçekten kötü bir şey mi?
Bildiğim kadarıyla patentler, telif haklarına göre daha kısa süreliler.
Bizde patent sanırım 20 yılda serbest kalır. Telif hakkı ise 75 yıl artı varislere devir
yoluyla binlerce yıl serbest kalamaz.
20 yıl sonra dünya özgür olacaksa, özgürlüğe bir yatırım olarak görebiliriz.
Ayrıca bu yoldan geçerek, elektronik ortamda saklanan her türlü bilgi (müzik, film, kitap, v.s.)
patentleneceği için, patentin telif hakkına tercih edilmesi durumunda
onlarda serbest kalacak.
Bir de patentlenecek kod açılmak zorunda. Halbuki telif hakkı için bu
zorunluluk yok. m$ bu tuzağa düşmeyeceğine göre (kendi ülkesinde düşmedi,
Coca Cola'da düşmemişti) hedefte açık kodlu yazılımlar var.
Açık kodlu yazılımlar kapanın elinde kalacak gibi görünüyor...
Bir firma bir ucundan girdi zaten.
Şimdi soru şu:
Patent kaç yıl geçerli olacak, telif hakkı gibi varisten varise binlerce yıl kamudan kaçırılacak mı?
Böyle olacaksa, bu patentlerin özünde fikir suçunu barındırdığını gözardı etmemek gerekir.
(böyle olmasa da gözardı etmemek gerekir ama herşeyin bir bedeli var ya; özgür yazılım hariç)
Yazılım elektronik ortama aktarılan bilgi olduğuna göre, bilgi de bir fikir ürünü
olduğuna göre, birileri bu patentlerin güya-kuraldışı kullanımından dolayı fikirlerinden
dolayı yargılanacak belki de hapis cezalarına çarptırılacaklar.
AB üyeleri ise çook iyi bildiğiniz gibi fikir suçu denince hop oturup hop kalkıyorlar.
Bu açıdan bakınca bu ne lahana turşusu bu ne perhiz diyesi geliyor insanın...
Haa evet, suçlamalar devletten gelmeyecek, insanlar birbirini suçlayacak, ama ha aliveli
ha veliali, sonuçta suç oluşmayacak mı?
Dünya Deli Dumrul'ların yönetiminde derim hep, ne yazık ki çoğunluk onlarda, kendi gibilerini
seçiyorlar. İyi bir fikir üretmekten acizler, üretenlere de engel olma, çalıp çırpma, el koyma,
işgal peşindeler.
Soyut şeylerden somut kazançlar elde etme yolunda AB, ABD'nin ardından Euro ile yola çıktı zaten.
Onlarda para basma maliyetine dünyayı soymaya başladı. Tabii ki onlardan bu tür kopyalar
çekeceklerdir.
Hayat kısa, mutlu olmaya bakın. Onlar da böyle mutlu oluyor anlaşılan.
Birşey üretmemiz istenmiyorsa üretmeyiz, keyfimize bakarız.
Üç kuruş emekli maaşımla ben mutluyum, başkaları için de zor olmasa gerek.
Esen kalın,
Nilgün
Özgürlüğü elinden alınmaya çalışılan yazılımcı
Pazartesi 15 Eylül 2003 01:28 sularında, Mustafa Akgul şunları yazmıştı:
> Merhablar,
>
> Bir suredir, linux-sohbet listesinde Omer Tayiz'in basi cektigi bir
> tartisma surmektedir. LKD'nin bu konuda bir tavir almasi gundemde.
> Bu nedenle dernek listesine tasidim.
>
> asagida Yazilim Patent'leri bir yazi var.
>
> Ne yapilmasi konusunda bu listenin gorusunu alabilirmiyiz ?
>
> Saygilar
> Mustafa Akgul
>
>
>
>
> http://wiki.ael.be/index.php/TheDangerOfSoftwarePatentsToEurope
>
> The Danger Of Software Patents To Europe
> In the interests of multinationals and patent intermediaries, the
> European Patent Office has drifted away from law. Now, the Commission
> has proposed directive COM(2002)92, against the opinion of professionals
> and economic studies, to cover for these irregularities.
>
> The directive would allow software (currently under copyright) to be
> patentable, contrary to the European Patent Convention (which wouldn't
> be changed).
>
> Some consequences of the directive COM(2002)92 as proposed by the
> Commission:
>
> More monopolies and oligopolies in software. Software of worse quality
> at higher prices for consumers.
> SMEs will be discriminated in front of big corporations, and some
> business models will be discriminated in front of others (shareware, and
> free software would be marginalized).
> The EU would lose competitivity versus USA and Japan (which hold most of
> the already granted software patents that the directive would legalise)
> Software developers would lose productivity due to diversion of
> effort/resources from technical issues to legal issues. Technical work
> would be seriously burdened and unbounded legal uncertainity would
> appear.
> Harm to citizens' rights (freedom of expression and of being informed
> for citizens, labor rights for programmers, free markets for
> enterpreneurs and consumers)
> Policies in information society, e-Europe, free software and IT R&D
> would be compromised.
> Software patents are unnecessary, counter productive, dangerous and
> inconsistent:
>
> 1.- Unnecessary
> Innovation is inherent in software, since it is the only way to compete
> because "manufacturing" (producing copies), distribution and raw
> materials are equally cheap for all players.
>
> Free software shows there is enough incentive to innovate and disclose
> software creations without patents.
>
> Patents would protect software ideas and concepts. But in software ideas
> are easy to get, since the formal models of computers are prefectly
> known. The costly part is implementing these ideas in software that
> works, and that is already protected by copyright.
>
> None of the actors in software innovation is asking for software
> patents, they're either ignorant of any move to enact them or already
> opposing them. Only some patent offices, some patent lawyers, and some
> of those big corporations that delegate opinion to their patent
> departments are asking for software patents. This includes industry
> associations dominated by big corporations as opposed to SMEs (in
> Catalonia, year 2000, 74.4% of the jobs in companies with more than 10
> employees in the ICT sector are in companies with less than 200
> employees, possibly similar for all the EU)
>
> 2.- Counter productive
> Software has a great natural tendency to monopolisation, due to network
> effects (a program is more useful when many people use it) and other
> reasons. Granting 20 year monopolies on software ideas can only shield
> and strenghten present oligopolies, harming consumers, quality and
> innovation.
>
> Software development is very incremental, and combines many previous
> ideas in any project. Patenting software would eliminate the
> availability of raw materials and block creativity.
>
> It is unfeasible for a programmer or SME to check their software for
> patent infringement. So much so that many standards setting bodies don't
> require their participants to disclose what patents they have that may
> impede implementation of a standard, because they feel companies would
> not afford to search in their own patent potfolio. Let alone making sure
> they're not infringing anyone else's patents.
>
> 3.- Dangerous
> Ability to patent algorithms and data structures would give foreign
> corporations control over too many assets in the information society. By
> patenting data formats (or software to encode and decode those formats),
> companies could prevent authors from creating or distributing digital
> art or news. Already the 2 most used image formats in the Web (GIF and
> JPEG) are patented (so that your photos in the European Parliament web
> site might infringe on a patent). The same goes for audio (MP3) or video
> (MPEG-4). These and other patent holders can tax or censor much of the
> multimedia content in the world.
>
> Since the EPO has already illegally granted more than 30000 patents on
> software, mostly to USA or Japan companies, the directive while
> legalizing them, would leave foreign companies at a competitive
> advantage over European software houses
>
> Since software is information, restricting trade in software is a
> restriction in free speech too. Whereas a mechanical engineer will
> always be able to publish blueprints of patented engines, a software
> expert won't be able to publish blueprints of patented software, since
> software is its own blueprint, and publishing it would infringe the
> patents.
>
> Similarly, mechanical patents affect (directly) only those having a
> factory, while software patents affect anybody having a computer (it
> only takes a command to "manufacture" a new copy of a program).
>
> 4.- Inconsistent
> Patenting software is contradictory: A patent is a monopoly on a device
> in exchange for diffusion of (previously unavailable) information on the
> device. If you pretend the device to be software, since software is
> information you end up with patents that are a monopoly on information
> in exchange for diffusion of information. You can't diffuse information
> and monopolise it at the same time, so the deal can't work.
>
> Legalizing software patents in the EU is also inconsistent with the
> e-Europe strategy and the will to lead the world knowledge economy in
> the next decade. Most current (but hardly enforceable for now) software
> patents granted by the EPO belong to USA or Japan corporations, that
> would be suddenly left in a dominant position if the patents became
> legal. We can hardly win against our competitors by copying their
> mistakes. We would be much better having our businesses
>
> innovate while USA businesses litigate (like for instance the patent
> suit against e-bay that might stop or damage their activities in the
> USA).
>
> Last but not least software patents are incompatible with free software,
> since patented software would not be free, and free software authors
> could not pay patent licenses per copy since they don't even try to know
> how many copies of their programs exist (so much for shareware too).
> Free software such as linux or samba is already suffering from this.
> Hence, legalizing software patents would conflict with the recent trend
> to use and promote free software in European public admnistration, as
> proposed in a report by Unisys, for the European Program "Interchange of
> Data between Administrations" (already proposed in 2001 by the European
> Parliament's Temporary Committee on the Echelon Interception System, for
> security reasons, and recently a proposed EU security agency would
> include in their goals the promotion of free software). There are
> various other endorsements of free software in public administration
> which would be incompatible with software patents: UK, Germany, France,
> Spain, Finland...
>
> Europe needs to ensure ideas remain free and software is competitive,
> please support the Call for Action
> http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/eubsa-swpat0202/demands/ and help Eurolinux
> http://www.eurolinux.org