10.03.08
Opposition to Broad/Software Patents Grows
The important fight against software patents has just gained another well-known figure: Bruce Perens.
Perens said in a recent interview that the current system makes it too easy for patent trolls to sue, even when their patents may be bogus.
We need to restore justice to the patent system, and we also need to take a good look at the motivation for software patents, which many economists and others feel do more to hurt innovation than to promote it.
Software patents were not created by Congress, but by courts, at the same time as business method patents. These are often very broadly drawn, and holders use their power to tax real innovation.
Some days ago we wrote about the negative economic effects of patents. Here is an old talk from David Martin, who predicted doom & gloom for the patents ‘bubble’.
In the past we also wrote about Apple’s role in harming Free software with its patents. This new post contains a reminder of the Apple threat.
The problem is patents. LLVM’s license allows more room for Apple to use software patents than the GCC’s licenses do. And Apple now has the opportunity to maneuver themselves into a place where through those patents they can dominate the software that can be run on their machines. Those bastards!
The sooner the world understands this patent trap it’s irreversibly led to, the better. █
Highlight: Novell was the first to acknowledge that Microsoft FUD tactics had substance. Novell then used anti-Linux FUD to market itself. 
Highlight: Xandros let Microsoft make patent claims and brag about (paid-for) OOXML support. 
Highlight: Linspire's CEO not only fell into Microsoft arms, but he also assisted the company's attack on GNU/Linux. 
Highlight: Microsoft craves pseudo (proprietary) standards and gets its way using proxies and influence which it buys. 
Highlight: The invasion into the open source world is intended to leave Linux companies neglected, due to financial incentives from Microsoft. 
Analysis: Xen, an open source hypervisor, possibly fell victim to Microsoft's aggressive (and stealthy) acquisition-by-proxy strategy.
Yuhong Bao said,
November 1, 2008 at 12:27 am
On Apple and FOSS, that is another off-topic mess altogether dating back to when NeXT decided to develop a Obj-C front-end for GCC for the NeXTStep OS around 1990.
On Apple’s tying of hardware with software, when I heard that Psystar was going to use that as a challenge to the Apple vs Psystar lawsuit, I posted this blog article:
http://yuhong386.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!57E2793D0C53276F!164.entry
Yuhong Bao said,
November 1, 2008 at 12:28 am
BTW, here is an edit to one of the articles you quoted:
“EDIT 8-24-08: Commenter Owen (see below) points out that LLVM’s license actually stipulates better guarantees about the use of patents than i originally thought. It’s quite possible that I misunderstood the discussion on Saturday, or that somebody there was misinformed about the LLVM’s license.”