Is there any meaningful way to engage in activism or civil disobedience related to software patents? I support the FSF and EFF with donations, but I want to do more. As I see it, code is speech, and software patents are a restriction on the content of speech. I wish there was some way of dramatizing the issue, some way an activist could use software for a clearly beneficial charitable project that would also trigger legal action and produce headlines like "Software company dedicated to helping parents of chronically ill children research treatment decisions sued for billions for patent infringement."
I'm with you on this, I'm personally outraged by the situation, and the analogy to mob protection rackets is way too accurate for comfort.
The analogy has me thinking about how real mob protection rackets are dealt with (well, at least in the movies). The individual small business owner can't directly fight back, they have ties to the community that they have a real chance of losing, just like a software house that want's to be able to operate in the U.S. can't just up and leave or afford to fight back. The consequence is a legal equivalent of having your shop burned down. The only real power that can fight this kind of collusive power is that of public opinion. Other commenters have already mentioned this, but we cannot dismiss it because Google is an unsympathetic giant, we have to do something because you and I are the ones in real danger.
We don't have pi billion dollars to hire lawyers or bid on patent bundles, but we are the small guys, the rags to riches, the huslters, the american dream. Software patents are a lie invented by old people to stomp out innovation and maintain the status quo. If anyone can make software patents sound bad and get sympathy it's going to be us. We need to find a way to make these issues matter to people, to put it in their minds and tug on their heartstrings.
I don't know how to do it as an activist, but I bet we could do it as story tellers, as bloggers and media producers. We are the generation building the products and services of tomorrow, we know how things should work and what we want things to look like. In my opinion, we need to produce some pop culture. I've watched a lot of crime drama's, what's to stop us from making a biz drama with the same human impact but set in the context of the information age rather than NY city streets.
Even Google can't fight on their field, what chance do we have going head-on against money and greed. Our best hope is to use the most powerful weapon we have, public opinion.
It's exactly like a "protection tax" that small guys have to pay. After the small guys pay, they go to the big ones and show them the list of complying companies as "proof" that they are right. It's a typical patent troll strategy.
But Samsung is a big company. They should join B&N and Motorola and go to court with Microsoft. This will get others to do the same. It works both way. The more of Microsoft's patents get invalidated, the better for them in the long run anyway, because not only will Microsoft double the price next time, but others will start looking through their patent database and see if they can use anything to get a license fee from Android manufacturers as well.
I've submitted a blog post which extends on my thoughts here. I hope it serves as a call to action that we can actually participate in while we don't have legal teams or large coffers
It won't change until a cool new technology comes to the USA last because we've become known as a backwards intellectual property banana republic whose chief export is lawsuits.
People might start thinking about demanding change when the new Sony Awsoma 4d tv is available everywhere but here.
> Is there any meaningful way to engage in activism or civil disobedience related to software patents? I support the FSF and EFF with donations, but I want to do more.
You can boycott companies that abuse the patent system the most. Patent trolls don't have anything to boycott of course, but Microsoft definitely does.
I refuse to use Windows, XBOX, Windows Phone, etc., and I do my best to influence my non-techie friends and family to do the same. If enough people that understand the dangers of software patents do that, it will have an impact on Microsoft's bottom line, and potentially make it change its ways.
For those that say "Microsoft is just playing the game, we need to get lawmakers to change the rules," the fact is that software patents exist because major companies like Microsoft support them. If Microsoft, Apple, IBM and Google went to Washington DC tomorrow and opposed software patents, they would be undone.
"Software company dedicated to helping parents of chronically ill children research treatment decisions sued for billions for patent infringement."
This actually happens, only replace "software company" with
"pharmaceutical company". Johnson & Johnson and similar pharmaceutical companies makes it very hard for people to get cheap medicines by greedily enforcing their patents, which are more legitimate compared to most software patents. These pharmaceutical also lobbied and were rewarded with laws(masked as safety precautions,) that prevents the importation of cheaper medicine from Canada. Let's face it, this "protection racket" is a billion dollar scam that's only going to end by infiltrating the powers that be. When all the major players: Google, Apple, Microsoft, Sony, Sun, and Oracle decide that this nonsense must stop and copyright laws are sufficient, the protection racket will end. They have the money and influence to make the change.
No, because they'd simply decide not to sue you if it would garner bad publicity, and certainly no one is going to care that they could have. The only way patent law will change is when its faults begin to hurt moneyed interests (like anything else in Washington, really). It does seem to have some bite in that regard these days, so there certainly is some hope.
Yes, but but right now even if they get hurt a little by it, they also have a lot invested in it, and they stand to make more money by joining the game an suing others.
Also, patents did start to hurt the financial industry, and they simply gave them special powers to fight the patents, instead of overhauling the patenting system or abolishing them for everyone's benefit (except the patent trolls).
Exactly - nobody gets sued unless they have enough money or competitive position that the suit is seen as profitable. Nobody really has any sympathy with Google or any other large company, so there isn't much "outrage factor" involved. I think there is a pretty large human cost to the software patent system, but a lot of the cost is in discouragement of innovation and misallocation of resources.
Losing the auction is more a failure of partnership than anything else. The Apple team included MS, Sony, RIM, Ericsson, and EMC, while the Google only teamed up with Intel. Where were all the Android partners?
There are enough companies with high enough stakes in Android (Google, Motorola, Samsung .. etc) that if they pooled patients for their common defense, they would make MUCH less inviting targets. Heck, isn't this what MS has been saying they would do with Linux for years? Doesn't this legal precedent concern the corporations that are dependent on Linux (which is probably a large majority of tech companies today) ?
patents and patent auctions is a long-term chess game..
Google knew ahead of time it did not have the $4 billion that might be bid by a group..it was not in it to win the auction but to use the auction as a bit of distraction among those potential groups that could file patent lawsuits as to enforce $4 billion in patents is not millions of dollars but more likely $1 billion in lawyer fees, etc..such resources is not built up over night even among big companies.
