How IP Law Helps FOSS Communities 98
dp619 writes "Fighting against software patents (New Zealand has banned them) tends to blind FOSS communities to aspects of IP law that actually serve them well. While certainly not perfect, patent, copyright, trademark, and trade secret law each has something to offer FOSS communities. Penn State law professor Clark Asay wrote a guest post for the Outercurve Foundation briefly describing some of the ways in IP law can help open source developers."
New Zealand didn't ban software patents... (Score:4, Informative)
They basically just banned adding "on a computer", etc. to a patent automatically becoming a new patentable "invention".
Re:New Zealand didn't ban software patents... (Score:5, Informative)
*sigh* I am in New Zealand, and yes I have read and understood the legislation. For full disclosure I am also an Associate Member of the IITP, one of the groups who pushed hard to get this mess sorted out.
Most people skip the most important line which reads:
"A computer program is not a patentable invention." Section 15, part 3A: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2008/0235/latest/whole.html?search=sw_096be8ed8054d616_computer+program_25_se&p=1#DLM1419225 [legislation.govt.nz]
Now, is that unclear to anyone?
Re:again with the version from five years ago? (Score:3, Informative)
Here we have the legislative page: http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/legislation/bills/00DBHOH_BILL8651_1/patents-bill [parliament.nz]
Here we have the link to all related bill documents: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2008/0235/14.0/versions.aspx [legislation.govt.nz]
Additionally here we have a link to the "live" bill currently in force, this is the passed version, 235-2: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2008/0235/14.0/whole.html [legislation.govt.nz]
If you note Section 15, 3A, it still says the same. This is what is known as a trump line, in that under the currently in force legislation software is an invention which is not patentable.
I would be most interested in linked examples of what you are referring to, because I certainly have not found it on the government legislative website so far, so that a more informed debate may occur.
Re:again with the version from five years ago? (Score:3, Informative)
Ahh, just spotted what you were referring to, it's a SOP. A supplementary order paper, and in this case it is the one that caused controversy and was not enacted into the final bill: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/sop/government/2013/0237/latest/whole.html#DLM5187401 [legislation.govt.nz] . I repeat, this SOP is not in force. Such papers are proposals for changes to the bill, you'll see this one is shown to be a proposal by it stating it is so.
So, please be a bit more careful, and link to your material next time :)