> With Software Patents, you have proponents who make proprietary software, > and > you have opponents that make proprietary software and free software. > > With Free Software Patents, you don't have any proponents from any > business or > company that focuses on free software. Right? Am I wrong? >
I'd say fairly wrong. Firstly, when you say "Free Software Patents", I assume you mean patents being used against free software. In that case, it isn't a question of whether free software companies are proponents of patents. It's a question of whether non-free software companies (who are proponents of patents) want to use them against free software companies, and the answer to that is "yes". Look back at patent litigation against free software projects in the last decade. Usually they don't directly litigate against free software projects (who, as you say, are usually individuals), but against businesses using free software. (We absolutely want to protect those businesses in this community -- it is as much about them as the individuals.) Look at Microsoft's suits against TomTom for using Linux in their GPS devices. Look at Apple's suits against Android manufacturers. Look at Oracle's suit against Google over Java in Android. Then there's the non-litigous "FUD" claims, such as the claims Microsoft spread near the end of the decade about Linux violating Windows patents -- that is an attempt to get businesses scared of free software. Do you think these companies want to give up that edge over free software? Make no mistake: there will be huge resistance from patent holders to a proposal that makes it illegal to sue companies and individuals using free software that violates patents. > So the way I see it, the big opposition is going to have a much harder time > arguing for free software patents - frequently written by individuals - not > businesses, who often have no funds to defend themselves, and are generally > unable to make use of the patent system anyway! > But they won't be going after the individuals, they'll be going after the businesses who do have funds to defend themselves. They'll be coming out and saying "how dare Samsung sell a device with free software on it that steals our ideas?" They'll find a way to not make it look like a David v Goliath. It's as if I write a recipe book, and donate it to the public library for > all > to make use of as they best see fit. Then some corporation comes along and > demands the book be burnt, and the author pay a large sum in compensation > because the steps for a recipe in that book are similar to what the > corporation came up with in a different book they probably never published. > No, it's more like if you write a recipe book and say "anyone can sell my recipes" and then a big company comes along and starts selling your records, and *then* another company goes and sues them for selling your recipes that are similar to theirs. That isn't such a black and white issue (at least in the public view) because it's company vs company. Even though in my view, it is wrong. _______________________________________________ Free-software-melb mailing list [email protected] http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb
