This time the Monthly Insight to Interoperability editor had a chance to chat with Florian Mueller who is the campaign manager of NoSoftwarePatents.com. Read here what is his take on the issues that could be affected by European Software patents.

Riina: What is the biggest threat, in your opinion, that the European software patents could have on technical interoperability of any software, systems and applications?

Florian Mueller: The grave danger is that a few large corporations with massive patent portfolios form a de facto cartel by way of cross-licensing and can seriously threaten anyone who doesn't have the patent arsenal that enables him to seriously deter an attack. Consequently, customer choices would be reduced in all areas. Among other things, that would also affect the aspect of interoperability because it would be up to the patent superpowers to determine what level of functionality they allow their competitors to have.

Riina: Could you explain a little bit more the issue on interoperability and how it is addressed in the proposed new European directive on software patents?

Florian Mueller: We have to be realistic: the real battle is about the scope of patentability of software. If that one is defined properly, then there is no interoperability issue. If it is defined in a way that it encompasses software, then an interoperability privilege can potentially constitute an exception to the rule.

Riina: How important is an interoperability privilege in the forthcoming software patent directive, relative to other items that are being debated, such as the scope of patentability?

Florian Mueller: In this case, the interoperability is of less than secondary importance to me. The real solution, in my opinion, is to exclude software from the scope of patentability, like the European Parliament proposed in September of 2003. That also takes care of interoperability.

Riina: It is usually said that the open standards are key to free market. There are different standards, like de facto and industry standards that are not ratified by any official standards body. How do you see software patents effecting on interoperability at this level?

Florian Mueller: Those de facto standards are the outcome of what is called "network effects": You use a product because everyone else uses it. You send someone a Word-file because most people do it. Economists accurately say that software patents only serve to enhance those network effects, i.e. individual companies establishing de facto standards that they control.

Riina: How about the existing standardisation bodies and consortia, what could they do to assure that the new standards don't consist of
technologies that have patents on them?

Florian Mueller: Frankly, I think they have already lost that battle. The problem is where interoperability starts and, even more so, where it ends. If you and I are in a telephone conversation, which of our body parts are related to our "interoperability" in that conversation and which are not? We could say we just need our mouths and vocal chords and ears, but then those don't work without the brain, the brain doesn't function without blood and oxygen, and a wound in any part of the body can cause the loss of blood. You never know where to draw the line.

Riina: What is your opinion about legislating and regulating the format in which info is made available for the public?

Florian Mueller: My answer is: Disallow software patents. Open source has all the power to ensure a balanced and functioning market once again. It doesn't have to be promoted or treated preferentially by governments. We just have to keep the patent threat away from it (and from the small and medium-sized enterprises).

Riina: Do you think that software patents could also hinder the societal and economical adoption of a certain technology that allows
interoperability, but happens to have a patent on it? Could you give an example?

Florian Mueller: I guess the most prominent example is that Microsoft owns key patents related to the Sender ID anti-spam technology. Because of that, there is still no agreement in place on the adoption of that concept, and Microsoft proposed license terms that would have precluded open-source software from the opportunity of implementing that relatively simple idea.

Links:
The Problem of Software Patents in Standards by Bruce Perens:
http://perens.com/Articles/PatentFarming.html

View a panel discussion on Standards, interoperability and patents (9.11.04) at Regulating Knowledge
http://en.eu.ffii.org/sections/bxl0411/program/

Information about European Software Patents:
NoSoftwarePatents.com
www.NoSoftwarePatents.com

The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII)
http://swpat.ffii.org/

An example of what it could be like to make web-business with patents:
http://webshop.ffii.org/

Some consotria's responses to Software patents:
W3C Patent Policy

Working Group:
http://www.w3.org/2001/ppwg/

Definitions of Open standards:
http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php
http://perens.com/OpenStandards/Definition.html