But in international sporting circles, New Zealand is famous for the success - and ferocity - of their national rugby team, the All-Blacks, and for the ritual haka dance (borrowed from the native Maori tribes who were once the areas only inhabitants) which they perform before matches to intimidate their opponents.
So, the New Zealanders, or kiwis, as they are sometimes called, have just performed a giant haka in the face of the tech industry's patent obsessives. By declaring that software is not patentable, New Zealand has given added credibility to those who believe that attempts at aggressive patent protection, like that we have seen increasing over the past few years, stifle innovation and competition.
Some may scoff that New Zealand is too small and out of the way to make any difference in the interests of mega-corporations in places like the US or Korea, but they would be wrong for two reasons. First, the potential impact of opinions or events is no longer limited by geography. If the reasoning resonates, its genesis is almost irrelevant. And the fact that this comes from a well-regarded judiciary steeped in the Anglo-Saxon legal tradition suggests that this may be the beginning of a trend rather than a one-off.
But secondly, New Zealand has some gravitas in this matter. It happens to be the home of a guy known as Kim Dotcom, an internet entrepreneur and alleged hacker of global proportions who has been accused of costing the entertainment industry alone over $500 million for his innovations in file and data storage which had 150 million subscribers before it was shut down. He's just started a new one. Might want to give your patent attorney a jingle. JL
Jolie O'Dell reports in Venture Beat:
“A computer program is not a patentable invention.”Time to bust out the champagne*, neckbeards! The above statement is from a bill that just passed in New Zealand.
In a word, free software advocates have won a big battle in a small country, but the ramifications of the decision are encouraging and potentially helpful to the cause.
More relevant text from the bill:
We received many submissions concerning the patentability of computer programs. … Open source, or free, software has grown in popularity since the 1980s. Protecting software by patenting is inconsistent with the open source model, and its proponents oppose it. A number of submitters argued that there is no “inventive step” in software development, as “new” software invariably builds on existing software. They felt that computer software should be excluded from patent protection as software patents can stifle innovation and competition, and can be granted for trivial or existing techniques. In general we accept this position. …If we may be permitted a celebratory naughty word, hot damn!
[With regard to corporations fighting for proprietary software,] After careful consideration we concluded that developing a clear and definitive distinction between embedded and other types of software is not a simple matter; and that, for the sake of clarity, a simple approach would be best. We received advice that our recommendation to include computer programs among the inventions that may not be patented would be unlikely to prevent the granting of patents for inventions involving embedded software.
New Zealand has sided with companies such as the so-over-patent-disputes Google and the patents-what-patents Facebook in its quest for more freedom in innovation.
In the words of one of our favorite Internet characters, “The open ability to develop new applications and try them out has been vital to the Internet’s growth and to the space in which we currently operate. … Shoot the patent lawyers.”
* Just kidding. We know you drink craft brews, not champagne.
Read more at http://venturebeat.com/2013/08/28/software-patents-are-now-illegal-in-new-zealand/#PyxEsTuzdsaP5z3H.99
0 comments:
Post a Comment