Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Software will not be patentable in New Zealand

nzherald.co.nz

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–128 of 128 posts

Re: Software will not be patentable in New Zealand

#121

Post by holloway »

SeanDav wrote: post #64
holloway wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great Ape personhood, or at least granting them the right to not have cruel tests done, has been done by several other nations not just New Zealand: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_ape_personhood I can't remember the exact wording but one provision was about how they couldn't be exported unless it was in their best interests. E.g. you can't sell them a circus overseas in which they would likely receive cruel treat…

I don't agree with the label, I do agree with the principle. Many animals show signs of sentience and even if they don't, they should not be allowed to undergo cruel testing. To try to only apply this to great apes shows a lack of understanding of the issues involved. It is often human nature to be guilty of anthropomorphizing. The intentions are noble, but the focus is too narrow and the label is quite frankly, ridi…

The label is a bit weird, I agree, but personhood is an established legal concept with clear interpretations and case law so I just think of it as lawyer speak. Extremely disabled people may lack clear communication and yet a person who makes decisions on their behalf is guided by similar principles. The argument in favour of personhood is that the benefits of that legal history outweigh the superficial qualms by using a slightly wrong title.

While other animals have sentience too this is about the thin edge of the wedge, and what's achievable in politics. You go for the creatures that are nearest to human and then increase it as is appropriate. It's important to establish precedent and not to go too far at once or else the first step will fail and politicians won't touch it again for a long time. I see it more as practical political expediency rather than a lack of understanding of how non-apes may be sentient too.

Re: Software will not be patentable in New Zealand

#122

Post by A1kmm »

lostlogin wrote: post #118
stephen_g wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that any company that sells to people in the US can have their product banned from import if it is found to infringe on patents there.

I have to ask (I do t understand this stuff), how do you ban software from import - login to NZ server, pay, download? Would a banner saying that people in the US are forbidden from doing this be enough to get the seller off the hook?

Disclaimer: IANAL, this is not legal advice.

Inducing someone to infringe a patent valid in the US by importing (downloading) your product into the US is itself an infringement of the patent under 35 USC 271 (b). Even with the banner, plaintiff / prosecution lawyers could argue that you were inducing infringement - otherwise, why use a banner and not one of the widely available IP geolocation databases for an IP based block? Why, for example, sell to credit cards issued by US banks? Obviously, if you put more effective technical measures in place, but people from the US are, say, using a non-US proxy and paying by BitCoin, it might be easier to defend.

If someone in NZ breaks US law, there is then a question of whether they can face any consequences for it if they never leave NZ. Patents law has both a civil and a criminal aspect to it.

Under NZ civil law, the New Zealand courts can enforce civil judgements made against a New Zealand resident person, but only if the matter doesn't relate to taxes, and the person was either physically in the jurisdiction that made the judgement on the day the suit was filed, or the person takes any action in the foreign lawsuit other than arguing lack of jurisdiction.

New Zealanders can be extradited to face criminal charges abroad, but subject to the following test: "if the conduct of the person constituting the offence in relation to the extradition country, or equivalent conduct, had occurred within the jurisdiction of New Zealand at the relevant time it would, if proved, have constituted an offence punishable under the law of New Zealand for which the maximum penalty is imprisonment for not less than 12 months or any more severe penalty". That doesn't necessarily stop long and protracted proceedings - Kim Dotcom was probably protected by the safe harbour provisions under New Zealand copyright law.

Even if someone is safe from civil enforcement of a foreign judgement or criminal extradition, the US might still have power over them. For example, if they have assets in the US, they might not be safe. How do people pay to download the software - if it involves a payment system with US operations, like Visa or Mastercard, they might still be able to shut it down or garnish customer payments. Selling only by BitCoin might seriously hurt conversion rates.

Re: Software will not be patentable in New Zealand

#123

Post by loceng »

guard-of-terra wrote: post #111
loceng wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Motivations of the last 6% are probably relating to trying to create a business that won't just be copied by someone who has access to resources faster than them, e.g. entrepreneurs and business folk..

When you create a business you're not applying for patents, and when you apply for patents you're not creating a business.

Have you tried getting funding before for something that's complex, though then could easily be copied / re-engineered by big companies? Investors will know this and you won't be able to start the business with investors' money in most cases like this.

Re: Software will not be patentable in New Zealand

#124

Post by [deleted] »

ekianjo wrote: post #56
rimantas wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nordic countries are ridden with wellfare and are doing quite OK, I'd say. The problems Greeks and others are having are not related to wellfare.

Well welfare has a threshold effect. Nordic countries have very small populations to take care of. You'll see that countries where welfare becomes an issue are usually larger ones in the dozens of millions. But I wouldn't put all the nordic countries in the same basket. Last I know Sweden is not doing too well compared to Finland.

[deleted]

Re: Software will not be patentable in New Zealand

#125

Post by subsystem »

ekianjo wrote: post #56
rimantas wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nordic countries are ridden with wellfare and are doing quite OK, I'd say. The problems Greeks and others are having are not related to wellfare.

Well welfare has a threshold effect. Nordic countries have very small populations to take care of. You'll see that countries where welfare becomes an issue are usually larger ones in the dozens of millions. But I wouldn't put all the nordic countries in the same basket. Last I know Sweden is not doing too well compared to Finland.

"Last I know Sweden is not doing too well compared to Finland."

'But from another perspective, Finland’s performance looks disappointing. An alternative destination from Helsinki on one of those monster cruise ships is due west to Stockholm. Unlike Finland, Sweden chose not to join the euro. Until the crisis, that made little difference. Both countries did well; if anything Finland’s performance was stronger. But over the past five years their fortunes have diverged to the detriment of Finland.'

http://www.economist.com/node/21560865

Re: Software will not be patentable in New Zealand

#126

Post by throwawaykf1 »

eyko wrote: post #102
throwawaykf1 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Misconceptions abound. You cannot patent "operating system software" because it is an abstract concept with no embodiment, like "flying car" or "hyperdrive spaceship". And people did patent "media player with music in the cloud", or more accurately, various aspects thereof. Spotify famously got sued over a patent on a specific way to do DRM for streaming music, for example, when they entered the US. They just license…

> You cannot patent "operating system software" because it is an abstract concept with no embodiment, like "flying car" or "hyperdrive spaceship" Exactly why I started my sentence with _take it to the extreme_. Innovation in the US may not have slowed down (I would argue that it has, although I'm not in the US), but it has definitely become quite expensive. In my opinion, that's a barrier for independent software dev…

Actually, small players like startups and independent developers are the least likely to get hit with patent problems. It's only because the few trolls that sued a lot of small guys got a huge amount of publicity that it seems like a big problem. These trolls are abusing the cost asymmetry of patent litigation, and something needs to be done about this, but they are still relatively rare. Unfortunately, this problem shows signs of growing fast.

Re: Software will not be patentable in New Zealand

#127

Post by polymatter »

throwawaykf1 wrote: post #96
polymatter wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats misleading, since software patents are regularly granted anyway. From the article you quoted: "Patent laws in the UK and throughout Europe specify a non-exhaustive list of excluded things that are not regarded as inventions to the extent that a patent application relates to the excluded thing as such. This list includes programs for computers. Despite this, the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO…

It's not "ambiguity of English" -- all (usefulsoftware does have a technical effect. Or would you say software should be excluded from the "tech industry" and people should stop calling themselves "software engineers"? This is why it is mostly patentable in the EU. About the only thing the "technical effect" limitation prevents is business method patents.

I don't know the rules in detail, but the claim is that "software isn't patentable". And yet software with a technical effect is patentable. But all software has a technical effect. Ergo, software isn't patentable because its software, its patentable because it has a technical effect and UKIPO has granted patents on software on that basis. This means that claiming "software isn't patentable" is a misleading claim at best.

Re: Software will not be patentable in New Zealand

#128

Post by guard-of-terra »

loceng wrote: post #123
guard-of-terra wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you create a business you're not applying for patents, and when you apply for patents you're not creating a business.

Have you tried getting funding before for something that's complex, though then could easily be copied / re-engineered by big companies? Investors will know this and you won't be able to start the business with investors' money in most cases like this.

And how exactly do patents help you here?

Can you provide some examples?

Post reply on HN