ESP report February 2011

ESP status report: "What *you* can do" #000 (February 2011)

This is a status report

on active projects you can work on, which ESP is already working on or can help you get started.

Welcome to ESP's first status report. People often ask what they can do to

This is not about ESP's status, but rather about what's going on that you can participate in to make a difference and that ESP can help with.

This report is about what's happening in the world of software patents and what *you* can do to help. Rather than focus on what ESP has done, we want to focus on what's left that you can do.

Media discussions about software patents focus too much on individual lawsuits. In practically every case, the outcome will have no lasting effect, and neither party deserves public support. With intermittent status reports, we want to highlight the issues that are actually important for those who want to abolish software patents.

ESP's goal from the start has been to facilitate effective participation in the procedures that set patent policy. We've submitted amicus briefs to the US Supreme Court and CAFC and we lobby inside the European Parliament. We've also worked with local individuals and groups on specific projects in New Zealand, Australia, Canada, EU, Israel, and the USA. And we document all this on the public wiki so that people can benefit from our experience, even without being in contact with us.

We have 539 articles on the wiki. The text of this status report is there too, please add to it:

• http://en.swpat.org/wiki/ESP_report_February_2011

If abolishing software patents is important to you, take a look to see if there's something you can help with. Donations to ESP are also sought. Thanks.

• http://endsoftwarepatents.org/donate

1. USA: Microsoft goes to the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court's hearing of i4i v. Microsoft will be one of the few cases in 2011 that is actually important. Like in the Bilski case, neither party is calling for abolition of software patents, and the case doesn't directly ask the question of whether software ideas are patentable or not, but the scope does leave room for amicus briefs to explain how this sort of dispute is unavoidable when software is patentable.

The US Supreme Court hears so few patent cases, every ruling is important. Thirty years ago, the Supreme Court took three patent cases in a short time frame to set some limits on the patent system. With Bilski, and now this case, they might intend doing the same now.

What can be done:

• Analyse the Bilski ruling to understand what the judges look for
• Start preparing a brief - choosing arguments and justifying them

This work will be useful for all future cases, so it's very worthwhile.

Useful links:

• http://en.swpat.org/wiki/ESP%27s_next_US_amicus_brief
• http://en.swpat.org/wiki/I4i_v._Microsoft_at_the_US_Supreme_Court

Extra funds will have to be raised for legal fees if we're to submit an amicus brief.

2. Canada: 1-click goes to Federal Court of Appeal

This case will be important because it deals directly with a question of what is excluded from patentability in Canada. There is also the advantage that the patent is being attacked by the Canadian patent office, so the case is likely to go all the way to a ruling rather than an out of court settlement.

We've assembled information on the wiki and we've set up a mailing list. It looks like progress is within reach with this case, but we haven't yet found people in Canada to work with.

Useful links:

• http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Workspace_for_Canada_1-click_appeal
• http://lists.endsoftwarepatents.org/mailman/listinfo/canada-public-discuss

Extra funds may have to be raised for legal fees if we're to submit an amicus brief, depending on the complexity of the formal procedures.

3. EU: "unitary patent" to validate software patents by the back door

The companies that pushed for software patents in the EU in 2005 have been working on a new strategy: reorganise the courts to ensure the always get favourable rulings.

The current focus is on the "unitary patent", which would apply initially to twelve EU member states (via "enhanced cooperation"). This proposal is being fast-tracked, probably to get approval before the EU's Court of Justice gives it's legal opinion. A leaked document indicates that the Court will declare the proposal incompatible with the EU treaties.

ESP sent a letter to the JURI committee this week, asking to delay the debate until the publication of the Court's opinion. JURI decided against waiting. ESP will work next week to ask the European Parliament to delay its vote. This work is being done with APRIL (http://www.april.org/)

4. UK: Govt to review patents (submissions deadline: 1 March 2011)

Useful links: http://www.ipo.gov.uk/ipreview/ipreview-c4e/ipreview-c4e-patents.htm

5. The WebM video format

Useful links: http://en.swpat.org/wiki/WebM_and_VP8

6. Ongoing: Australia, New Zealand, (Israel?)

Useful links:

• http://endsoftwarepatents.org/australia
• http://en.swpat.org/wiki/New_Zealand
• http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Israel

7. The ESP wiki progress

We have 538 articles.

8. Get involved or donate to ESP

Fighting software patents is important, and needs your financial support. ESP is a small organisation doing a lot of work. We keep our running costs low, and we work with people who are dedicated to this issue. Your donations make a difference.

http://endsoftwarepatents.org/donate

9. Add your text here

Want to alert people about something happening where you live? Is the patent office holding a consultation? Is the government compiling a report in patents or innovation? Are you going to contact an SME union to suggest putting software patent abolition on their policy list?

Add your scoop to the wiki:

• http://en.swpat.org/wiki/ESP_report_February_2011