 |
|
CONTENT SYNDICATION 
|
|
CONTENT SYNDICATION
|
|
BLOGROLL OPML:
|
|
|
|
Search in IPJUR.COM
|
BLOG@IP::JURPatent Attorney Axel H Horns' Blog on Intellectual Property Law.
Friday, May 06, 2005ATTAC and the Formation of a Unified Anti-IP Front.The German branch of the anti-globalisation network Attac has just published a campaign booklet under the title "Wissensallmende - Gegen die Privatisierung des Wissens der Welt durch 'geistige Eigentumsrechte'" (In German only; the English translation of the title is: "Knowledge Commons - Against the privatisation of the knowledge of the world by 'Intellectual Property'").Since long it is an open secret that (although they seem to act independently from each other) the various grassroots groups of anti-patent campaigners like FFII e.V., Greenpeace, or Attac are tied together by a maybe vague but existing common commitment to a utopia of a world substantially free of Intellectual Property rights.The booklet authored by Mr. Sebasitan Bödecker, Mr. Oliver Moldenhauer, and Mr. Benedikt Rubbel now gives a more concise overview of the political goals these new social grassroots movements desire to achieve. Unfortunately it is written in German; so there will be only a limited audience abroad. Bödecker et al. present a 'tour d'horizon' covering all major areas of Intellectual Property including Copyright, Patents, Designs, and even Trade Marks are not left out. Of course, they are not neutrally discussing the pros and cons of these legal constructs but they provide food for agitation against them. On the long run, the authors want to promote a new social movement as powerful as the pro-environment campaigners now are. For today, they compare themselves with the environmental movement in its infancy fifty years ago. In as few decades as possible they want to become as powerful as the environmentalists are today. Those who are dealing in a professional context with Patents and have a sufficient command of the German language should read the booklet in order to learn important facts about their political adversaries. As far as I know there is, at the time being, no other comparable presentation of the anti-IP movement. It will surely be necessary for all of them to be able to produce sufficient arguing in response to the allegations raised by the anti-IP campaigners. Another interesting question in response to this booklet is the connectivity between copyright affairs, on the one hand, and patent affairs, on the other hand. Can the IP system be defended only in its entirety or will there be a considerable shear stress from groups defending the copyright system but not the patent system, and, not to forget, vice versa?
"the various grassroots groups of anti-patent campaigners like FFII e.V., Greenpeace, or Attac are tied together by a maybe vague but existing common commitment to a utopia of a world substantially free of Intellectual Property rights." s/free of Intellectual Property rights/free of software patents is much more precise. FFII and others do not want to get rid of patents for ABS systems for example.
Zoobab is naive. He may think that the FFII are only opposed to CII patents and wouldn't abolish patents on ABS breaking systems, but he ignores the evidence. The amendments proposed by the FFII to the CII Directive would absolutely have the effect of abolishing ABS patents. The leaders of the FFII know that, but they continue to feed their disciples with the view that they are only against "Software" patents. Zoobab, we are ALL against software patents because a software patent is an impossibility. Software is code. It can't be patented. The effect of the code when working in a machine is of course patentable - and should continue to be so. Your leaders deceive you, Zoobab. Why don't you sit down with a good patent lawyer and let him explain exactly what the FFII are REALY asking for with their amendments.
Maybe you should call the Irish Presidency about the word processor error in their press release of the 18th may political agreement? http://ue.eu.int/cms3_applications/Applications/newsRoom/LoadDocument.asp?directory=en/intm/&filename=80641.pdf We all agree that this directive is only about exclusion rights about functions of what the software does. This is enough to prevent software producers to produce and to benefit honestly from their software creations.
So, FFII has posted a text [in German] dissociating themselves from efforts of ATTAC and other organisations to unify the various branches of the anti-IP movement. They say that FFII support IP in general but merely have some criticism with regard to the patentability of computer-implemented inventions or "software patents", whatever the difference between both concepts might be. That is good news, indeed! However, the question which remains is whether or not surch statements should be taken very serious. There are surely influencial members and/or supporters of FFII or other people from the anti-EU-Directive crowd who indeed desire to build up something like a unified anti-ip movement, see e.g. Benjami Mako Hill. And, of course, there is Mr. Pilch's doctrine saying "Copyright is the 'Intellectual/Industrial Property' (I2P) Paradigm of the Future", or, "Industrial Copyright -- Toward an Integrated System of 'Intellectual/Industrial Property'" leaving the overall impression that FFII well desires to abolish that patent system altogether. Pretending to maintain or extend copyright as it now stands does not mean to be outside of some unified Anti-IP movement because of the primary goal, the Universal Knowledge Commons, can well be established in a society where copyright laws exist. Time will show whether or not FFII dissociating from Anti-IP extremists was merely a lip-service.  Post a Comment
|