Move to Europe [LWN.net]

Move to Europe

Posted Oct 15, 2007 17:47 UTC (Mon) by simlo (subscriber, #10866)
Parent article: A visit from the trolls

If the Linux companies moved to Europe we would gain two things:
1) Patents wouldn't hurt Linux at much directly.
2) European politicians would have a harder job introducing software patents here since it would hurt European companies over American companies.
3) The software patents in the US could be seen as trade barriers preventing those European companies entering the US market. There would thus be a pressure on the US to abolish the system rather than a pressure on Europe to copy it.

Esben

(Log in to post comments)

Move to Europe

Posted Oct 15, 2007 18:16 UTC (Mon) by Max.Hyre (subscriber, #1054) [Link]

1) Patents wouldn't hurt Linux at much directly.

Depends on what counts as ``directly''. Developers, and thus development would be freed by such a move.

Unfortunately, unlike copyright, patent applies to anyone using the patented material as well. Thus, the trolls could sue GNU/Linux users. Our distros would have to go offshore, too, and we'd be downloading them clandestinely, not letting anyone know what OS we're running. Bittorrent use would go 'way up.

Picture a dark alley, complete with shady character displaying the contents of his coat: ``Psst, buddy. Want some hot Linux?'' :-/

Are you serious??

Posted Oct 16, 2007 13:19 UTC (Tue) by hummassa (subscriber, #307) [Link]

<font class="QuotedText">&gt;  patent applies to anyone using the patented material as well. </font>
 
Can anyone tell me if this is for real under USofAn patent law? Because 
under Brasilian patent law, you can use whatever patented invention in a 
personal, non-profit-generating way. But we also _explicitly_ forbid 
software, business methods, and game rules patents.

Are you serious??

Posted Oct 16, 2007 19:25 UTC (Tue) by sepreece (subscriber, #19270) [Link]

This is basically true in the US, though in practical terms, nobody is likely to sue over a
patent being used non-commercially by an individual.

Move to Europe

Posted Oct 15, 2007 20:05 UTC (Mon) by and (subscriber, #2883) [Link]

> 1) Patents wouldn't hurt Linux at much directly.

I don't agree. Nowadays there is a notion in the US justice system to
apply any US law worldwide. (Interestingly at the same time there seems to
be quite some resistance to obey international law if not convenient, but
that's a different story.) So even if these companies were headquatered in
Europe they still can get sued in the US and if they intend to continue
doing any business there they have to comply to the rulings. So, sorry, no
improvement this way...

> 3) The software patents in the US could be seen as trade barriers
> preventing those European companies entering the US market. There would
> thus be a pressure on the US to abolish the system rather than a
> pressure on Europe to copy it.

I guess it will stay as it is: US companies and officials trying to push
the Europeans to software patents to level the playing field. Probably
that's the more likely option

Move to Europe

Posted Oct 16, 2007 2:46 UTC (Tue) by dvdeug (subscriber, #10998) [Link]

Every country cares about what products get imported. If you import a game based on a work that's in the public domain in the US but under copyright in the EU into the EU, you will get sued, even if you're based in the US. (No video game based on Secret Adversary, for example.) You will be safe from American patents as long as you don't ship to the US, but the instant you start selling on a country's soil, those products have to conform to that country's laws.

Move to Europe

Posted Oct 16, 2007 6:31 UTC (Tue) by simlo (subscriber, #10866) [Link]

I remeber recently reading Microsoft won a case where they don't have to pay patent royalties
for products sold outside USA where the patent didn't apply. Thus USA recognices that the
patents in USA only applies there. Sorry no link.

Esben

Move to Europe

Posted Oct 19, 2007 0:54 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954) [Link]

The basic law has always been clear that a US patent covers making, selling, or using the invention in the US only. But there is a special statute (a relatively recent one) that covers a loophole wherein someone might make 99% of a product in the US and ship a kit to another company for final assembly and thus avoid patent liability. It says if you do that, you're liable just as if you had built it 100% in the US. But what you're liable for is what you did in the US: shipping the parts. Nobody applies US patent law to stuff that happens in other countries.

Microsoft was accused of exploiting that loophole and therefore being covered by this special statute, because Microsoft ships master CDs to be copied and sold by people in other countries. The court found that shipping a master CD does not fall under the final assembly law.