We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Abolish Software Patents
Details
Submitted by[?]: Kundrati Revolutionary Movement
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: March 2105
Description[?]:
| The pace of technological advancement in the Kundrati Union has been needlessly restricted by allowing the patent system to apply to the basic aspects of computer programming. The companies that got patents on the basic underlying functions of our computing systems have an absolute stanglehold on technology in general, and will continue to have it for years to come. Due to the rate of advancement in the technological sector, the only way to remain competitive both internally and abroad is to remove these restrictions and allow all to freely work with and improve upon the various software designs, techniques, formulae and algorithms. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The patenting of software techniques.
Old value:: Software patents can be obtained from the patent office.
Current: Software patents can be obtained from the patent office.
Proposed: Software designs, techniques, formulae and algorithms cannot be patented.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 09:20:38, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Kundrati Revolutionary Movement | To | Debating the Abolish Software Patents |
| Message | see previous debate here: http://82.238.75.178:8085/particracy/main/viewbill.php?billid=15539 |
| Date | 10:08:48, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Rational Future | To | Debating the Abolish Software Patents |
| Message | We concur providing that innovators be fairly compensated by the state for their work. We must be careful not to remove the incentive for advancement. |
| Date | 10:44:54, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Capitalist Freedom Party | To | Debating the Abolish Software Patents |
| Message | We disagree. Whilst we are much of the advocate of trading technologies -- we believe that if a group has managed to 'invent' new software designs, algorithms et cetera, then they have thus earned the right to enjoy the fruits of their labor. In the meantime, retaining such Patent will actually also promote such things as Royalties, and the market of data trading -- thus benefiting the economy. In the meantime, passing this proposal is a major conceed toward Software Piracy. We see little need in revoking Patent rights in the software industry, since the incentive of software advancement is in the fact of the benefits a fully recognized Patent -- and the added opportunities thereafter. |
| Date | 13:14:34, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Rational Future | To | Debating the Abolish Software Patents |
| Message | We propose an alternative. For the most part, patents will remain for the reasons outlined by the Capitalist Freedom Party. However, should it be necessary for the public good of the Kundrati Union to breach patent laws, then the state is within its rights to do so. |
| Date | 21:21:51, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Unio enim si quis Motus Populi | To | Debating the Abolish Software Patents |
| Message | Again, we state there is no incentive to create somthing new if it can just be stolen so easily by larger competitors and manufactuors, and then created more cheaply and sold at a lower cost. |
| Date | 22:26:58, August 31, 2005 CET | From | Party of Evil | To | Debating the Abolish Software Patents |
| Message | Why do we need patents for software? Doesn't copyright provide enough protection? |
| Date | 10:36:50, September 01, 2005 CET | From | Capitalist Freedom Party | To | Debating the Abolish Software Patents |
| Message | "However, should it be necessary for the public good of the Kundrati Union to breach patent laws, then the state is within its rights to do so." But then why ought the State be allowed to be above the law. What I would propose is a neutrally-elected body to be established -- for cases to be heard / decided upon individually. For example, he who wants to use the algorithm and wants to challenge one's Patent rights may do so as a "prosecutor" through our civil justice system. And he who owns the Patent rights would by default be the "defender". If a case can be proven on the balance of probibility that it is BENEFICIAL FOR SOCIETY, and ONLY beneficial for society that the Patent Rights be removed, then the Body may rule to do so. |
| Date | 20:23:20, September 01, 2005 CET | From | Kundrati Revolutionary Movement | To | Debating the Abolish Software Patents |
| Message | NS - Software patents do not cover content or products. Those fall under copyright. Software patents cover things like methods for doing some action within a programming language. Like a method to use an input device such as a mouse to access a database over the internet (aka amazon's patent on 'one-click' sales). In the real world, if Tim Berners-Lee had been the sort to want to patent the world wide web, we very probably would not be playing this game and the internet would still be something for the military, academics, and hardcore computer nerds. Royalty-free access is the only way that computing advancement happens. Software patents do not serve this end. |
| Date | 21:12:53, September 01, 2005 CET | From | Party of Evil | To | Debating the Abolish Software Patents |
| Message | Yes, that sounds logical. Okay, we'll support this. |
| Date | 03:40:13, September 02, 2005 CET | From | Unio enim si quis Motus Populi | To | Debating the Abolish Software Patents |
| Message | Software is content, I don't know what you're talking about. Everything that is contained with the hardware is software. The game on the disk is software. Say you make a game, a game that is created using code no one has every used before, and I, with there being no patents on your product, steal that code, make the exact same game only sell it for $20 cheaper. What is your incentive to keep making that game or advancing that code? |
| Date | 08:02:28, September 02, 2005 CET | From | Kundrati Revolutionary Movement | To | Debating the Abolish Software Patents |
| Message | The patent Amazon.com has for 'one-click' net shopping isn't about the specific code they used. It is about the very idea of using a database to allow people to have their credit card info stored elsewhere and accessing it through the use of a cookie. Anybody who creates code for doing this without paying Amazon will wind up involved in costly litigation, even if their code was created completely independently and bears only the most passing resemblence to the code Amazon uses. And they will almost certainly lose. Software patents mean that before you can release a product, you have to comb through the existing hundreds of thousands of patents to make sure that nobody is going to sue you over anything, and pay off lots of companies that own patents on the basic stuff that all programs wind up using. In any case, computer games cannot be patented; they fall under copyright. So even if we accepted your argument about the need for monopoly incentivies (which we don't), that is already covered elsewhere. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 137 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 128 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 1 |
| Random fact: Role-play is most enjoyable and successful when there is good communication and friendly relations between all players involved. |
| Random quote: "The problem is big government. If whoever controls government can impose his way upon you, you have to fight constantly to prevent the control from being harmful. With small, limited government, it doesn't much matter who controls it, because it can't do you much harm." - Harry Browne |