FOSS cannot go in sync with software patent model where every single simple ideas are patented by monopolies like micro$oft,apple,intel etc.
it is NOT some "right" of the developer that patents give,instead a weapon to monopolists to suppress FOSS projects and developers,small companies etc.
the "right" to sue/fine ur competitor and competitor sue u again for some other so called software patents.M$ in essence is a victim of this.
I think it is greedy to assume patents for software when copyright/EULA give protection to their works.
it is impossible to develop a free open source software(FOSS) without fearing any patent calls from monopolistic companies.
we can aruge YES and NO incessantly; but the fact that the very idea of software patent itself is in dispute is a happy thing.
Quote:
|
The United States Patent and Trademark Office has traditionally not considered software to be patentable[dubious – discuss][8] because by statute patents can only be granted to "processes, machines, articles of manufacture, and compositions of matter". In particular, patents cannot be granted to "scientific truths" or "mathematical expressions" of them. This means that most of the fundamental techniques of software engineering have never been patented.
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Softwar...#United_States
FOSS stance is very clear and ethical:
Quote:
There is tremendous animosity in the free software community towards software patents. Much of this has been caused by free software/open source projects shutting down[26] when the holders of patents covering aspects of a project demanded license fees that the project could not or was not willing to pay or offered licenses under terms which the project was unwilling to accept, or could not accept because it conflicted with the open source license in use.[27]
Several patent holders have offered royalty-free patent licenses. Companies that have done this include IBM, Microsoft, Nokia, Novell,[28] Sun Microsystems and Unisys. Such actions have rarely appeased the free/open source software community for reasons such as fear of the patent holder changing their mind or problems with some of the license terms.
In the late 1990s, for example, Unisys, granted royalty free licenses to hundreds of not-for-profit organizations that used the patented LZW compression method and, by extension, the GIF image format. Unisys was still barraged by negative and sometimes obscene emails from the free/open source software community.[29]
In 2005 Sun Microsystems announced that they were making a portfolio of 1,600 patents available through a free software/open-source-type patent license called Common Development and Distribution License.[30]. This was criticized by the free/open source software community, however, since it did not release the source code under a free/open source software license[31]
In 2006, Microsoft's patent pledge not to sue Novell Linux customers, openSUSE contributors, and free/open source software developers[32] and the associated collaboration agreement with Novell[33] was met with disdain from the Software Freedom Law Center[34] while commentators from the Free Software Foundation stated that the agreement would not comply with GPLv3.[35][36]
Draft versions of the GNU GPL version 3 may also conflict with patents on software by preventing any patent holder from enforcing their patents against a user if said patent holder also distributes software covered by those patents under the GPL.[37]
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Softwar...ource_software
Quote:
Trend Micro might insist that its patent case against Barracuda Networks isn't about free software -- but try telling that to the free and open source software (FOSS) community. Since Barracuda Networks went public about the case last month, it has heard from "a tremendous number of individuals" according to Dean Drako, Barracuda's president and CEO. Even more significantly, announcement of the case has led to a boycott against Trend Micro.
The case is an attempt to enforce Trend Micro's patent for antivirus detection on an SMTP or FTP gateway. Already successfully used against such companies as McAfee, Symantec, and Fortinet, the patent is being applied against Barracuda for its distribution of Clam Antivirus (ClamAV), the popular FOSS antivirus program, with its hardware products. The case began when Barracuda sought a declaratory judgment in March 2007 after receiving a series of letters from Trend Micro in 2006-2007. Trend Micro responded by a filing with the American International Trade Commission in November 2007, claiming that ClamAV was being imported on the grounds that many of its contributors are from outside the United States. The schedule for the case is expected to be announced by the end of this month.
[..]
In the same vein, Pamela Jones of Groklaw wrote, "I think it's another attempt to attack the FOSS development model and force those using such software to pay the proprietary dudes a tax. That's the same dream that SCO started with, and Microsoft shares the dream. A lot of proprietary software folks realize the sun is setting on their business model, and they would like a piece of what is replacing it.... If ClamAV is not successfully defended, I think there may be an avalanche of this kind of attack, proprietary vendors looking for some silver to cross their palms from anyone using FOSS software."
|
read here:
http://www.linux.com/feature/126851
Here patent weapon is used by this company against each of its competitors and FOSS clamav too.