www-commits
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

www philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.tr...

From: GNUN
Subject: www philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.tr...
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 06:34:13 -0400 (EDT) 
CVSROOT:        /web/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     GNUN <gnun>     21/10/29 06:34:13

Modified files:
        philosophy/po  : danger-of-software-patents.translist 
                         danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn.po 
        server/standards: README.translations.zh-cn.html 
        server/standards/po: README.translations.zh-cn-en.html 
                             README.translations.zh-cn.po 
Added files:
        philosophy     : danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn.html 
        philosophy/po  : danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn-en.html 

Log message:
        Automatic update by GNUnited Nations.

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.translist?cvsroot=www&r1=1.13&r2=1.14
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn.po?cvsroot=www&r1=1.3&r2=1.4
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn-en.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/server/standards/README.translations.zh-cn.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.13&r2=1.14
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/server/standards/po/README.translations.zh-cn-en.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.9&r2=1.10
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/server/standards/po/README.translations.zh-cn.po?cvsroot=www&r1=1.37&r2=1.38

Patches:
Index: philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.translist
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.translist,v
retrieving revision 1.13
retrieving revision 1.14
diff -u -b -r1.13 -r1.14
--- philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.translist  26 Jun 2021 06:00:31 
-0000      1.13
+++ philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.translist  29 Oct 2021 10:34:13 
-0000      1.14
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
 <span dir="ltr">[es]&nbsp;<a lang="es" hreflang="es" 
href="/philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.es.html">español</a> &nbsp;</span>
 <span dir="ltr">[fr]&nbsp;<a lang="fr" hreflang="fr" 
href="/philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.fr.html">français</a> 
&nbsp;</span>
 <span dir="ltr">[ru]&nbsp;<a lang="ru" hreflang="ru" 
href="/philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.ru.html">русский</a> 
&nbsp;</span>
+<span dir="ltr">[zh-cn]&nbsp;<a lang="zh-cn" hreflang="zh-cn" 
href="/philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn.html">简体中文</a> 
&nbsp;</span>
 <span dir="ltr">[zh-tw]&nbsp;<a lang="zh-tw" hreflang="zh-tw" 
href="/philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.zh-tw.html">繁體中文</a> 
&nbsp;</span>
 </p>
 </div>' -->
@@ -14,5 +15,6 @@
 <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" lang="es" hreflang="es" 
href="/philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.es.html" title="español" />
 <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" lang="fr" hreflang="fr" 
href="/philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.fr.html" title="français" />
 <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" lang="ru" hreflang="ru" 
href="/philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.ru.html" title="русский" />
+<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" lang="zh-cn" hreflang="zh-cn" 
href="/philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn.html" title="简体中文" />
 <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" lang="zh-tw" hreflang="zh-tw" 
href="/philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.zh-tw.html" title="繁體中文" />
 <!-- end translist file -->

Index: philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn.po
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn.po,v
retrieving revision 1.3
retrieving revision 1.4
diff -u -b -r1.3 -r1.4
--- philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn.po   29 Oct 2021 10:21:45 
-0000      1.3
+++ philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn.po   29 Oct 2021 10:34:13 
-0000      1.4
@@ -14,7 +14,6 @@
 "MIME-Version: 1.0\n"
 "Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8\n"
 "Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\n"
-"X-Outdated-Since: 2021-09-11 09:55+0000\n"
 
 #. type: Content of: <title>
 msgid "The Danger of Software Patents - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation"

Index: server/standards/README.translations.zh-cn.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/server/standards/README.translations.zh-cn.html,v
retrieving revision 1.13
retrieving revision 1.14
diff -u -b -r1.13 -r1.14
--- server/standards/README.translations.zh-cn.html     19 May 2021 06:59:34 
-0000      1.13
+++ server/standards/README.translations.zh-cn.html     29 Oct 2021 10:34:13 
-0000      1.14
@@ -10,7 +10,6 @@
 <!--#include virtual="/server/standards/po/README.translations.translist" -->
 <!--#include virtual="/server/banner.zh-cn.html" -->
 <h2 id="guide">www.gnu.org 网页翻译指南</h2>
-<div class="thin"></div>
 
 <p id="intro">翻译 gun.org
 上的众多文章
、保持译文的更新，是复杂而需细致组织的工作。译者
们按语言分成对应的小组，一般每个小组都有一个协调员。然而有些语言还没有相应的小组，同时也有小组缺少协调员。</p>
@@ -235,189 +234,151 @@
 
href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org";>&lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>。开始é˜
…
读至少前两个手册，并且如果有任何疑问，向翻译管理员寻求帮助。</p>
 
 <h3 id="teams">翻译小组</h3>
-<!--Some docs refer to this anchor-->
-<span id="TranslationsUnderway"></span> 
 
-<p>建立新小组的志愿者不仅会受到欢迎，而且还可以在学习
过程中得到帮助。</p>
+<!--Some docs refer to this anchor-->
+<p id="TranslationsUnderway">建立新小组的志愿者不仅
会受到欢迎，而且还可以在学习过程中得到帮助。</p>
 
 <p>以下的列表中，语言代ç 
åŽé¢æ˜¯è¯­è¨€åç§°ï¼ŒæŽ¥ç€å°±æ˜¯å°ç»„协调员的名字。</p>
 
 <ul>
 
 <!-- Please keep this list alphabetical-->
-<li><code>ar</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/www-ar";>Arabic</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/ka2in";>Fayçal Alami</a> - New
-coordinator needed) </li>
+<li><code>ar</code> - <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ar">Arabic</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/ka2in">Fayçal Alami</a> - New coordinator
+needed) </li>
 
-  <li><code>az</code> - Azerbaijani (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/igrar";>Igrar Huseynov</a> - New
-coordinator needed) </li>
+  <li><code>az</code> - Azerbaijani (New coordinator needed)</li>
     
-  <li><code>bg</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-bg";>Bulgarian</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/yavor";>Yavor Doganov</a> - New
+  <li><code>bg</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-bg">Bulgarian</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/yavor">Yavor Doganov</a> - New
 coordinator needed)</li>
  
-  <li><code>bn</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-bn";>Bengali</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/suzan";>Khandakar Mujahidul Islam</a> -
-New coordinator needed) </li>
-    
-  <li><code>ca</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ca";>Catalan</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/puigpe";>Miquel Puigpelat</a> - New
+  <li><code>bn</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-bn">Bengali</a>
+(New coordinator needed)</li>
+    
+  <li><code>ca</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ca">Catalan</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/puigpe">Miquel Puigpelat</a> - New
 coordinator needed) </li>
 
-  <li><code>cs</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-cs";>Czech</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/franta";>František Kučera</a>)</li>
-    
-  <li><code>da</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-da";>Danish</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/erikg";>Erik Gravgaard</a> - New
+  <li><code>cs</code> - <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-cs">Czech</a> 
(<a
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/franta">František Kučera</a>)</li>
+    
+  <li><code>da</code> - <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-da">Danish</a>
+(New coordinator needed) </li>
+
+  <li><code>de</code> - <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-de">German</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/joeko">Joerg Kohne</a>)</li>
+  
+  <li><code>el</code> - <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-el">Greek</a> 
(<a
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/gzarkadas">Georgios Zarkadas</a> - New
 coordinator needed) </li>
 
-  <li><code>de</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-de";>German</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/joeko";>Joerg Kohne</a>)</li>
-  
-  <li><code>el</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-el";>Greek</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/gzarkadas";>Georgios Zarkadas</a> - New
+  <li><code>eo</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-eo">Esperanto</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/civodul">Ludovic Court&egrave;s</a> - New
 coordinator needed) </li>
 
-  <li><code>eo</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-eo";>Esperanto</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/civodul";>Ludovic Court&egrave;s</a> -
-New coordinator needed) </li>
-    
-  <li><code>es</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-es";>Spanish</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/dora";>Dora Scilipoti</a>, <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/jfrtnaga";>Javier Fernández
-Retenaga</a>)</li>
+  <li><code>es</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-es">Spanish</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/dora">Dora Scilipoti</a>, <a
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/jfrtnaga">Javier Fernández Retenaga</a>)</li>
 
   <li><code>fa</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-fa";>Farsi/Persian</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/bandali";>Amin Bandali</a>) </li>
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-fa">Farsi/Persian</a> (<a
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/bandali">Amin Bandali</a>) </li>
     
-  <li><code>fi</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-fi";>Finnish</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/solarius";>Ville</a> - New coordinator
-needed)</li>
+  <li><code>fi</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-fi">Finnish</a>
+(New coordinator needed)</li>
 
-  <li><code>fr</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-fr";>French</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/barbier";>Denis Barbier</a>, <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/th_g";>Thérèse Godefroy</a>)</li>
+  <li><code>fr</code> - <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-fr">French</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/barbier">Denis Barbier</a>, <a
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/th_g">Thérèse Godefroy</a>)</li>
     
-  <li><code>he</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-he";>Hebrew</a> (New coordinator
-needed) </li>
+  <li><code>he</code> - <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-he">Hebrew</a>
+(New coordinator needed) </li>
 
-  <li><code>hr</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-hr";>Croatian</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/mist";>Martina Bebek</a> - New
-coordinator needed)</li>
+  <li><code>hr</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-hr">Croatian</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/mist">Martina Bebek</a> - New coordinator
+needed)</li>
 
   <li><code>id</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-id";>Indonesian</a> (New
-coordinator needed) </li>
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-id">Indonesian</a> (New coordinator
+needed) </li>
     
-  <li><code>it</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-it";>Italian</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/pescetti";>Andrea Pescetti</a>) </li>
-
-  <li><code>ja</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ja";>Japanese</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/gniibe";>NIIBE Yutaka</a>)</li>
-    
-  <li><code>ko</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ko";>Korean</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/blueguy";>Jongmin Yoon</a>) </li>
+  <li><code>it</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-it">Italian</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/pescetti">Andrea Pescetti</a>) </li>
 
-  <li><code>ku</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ku";>Kurdish</a> (New coordinator
-needed) </li>
+  <li><code>ja</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ja">Japanese</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/gniibe">NIIBE Yutaka</a>)</li>
+    
+  <li><code>ko</code> - <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ko">Korean</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/blueguy">Jongmin Yoon</a> - New
+coordinator needed) </li>
+
+  <li><code>ku</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ku">Kurdish</a>
+(New coordinator needed) </li>
     
   <li><code>ml</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ml">Malayalam</a>
 (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/aiswarya">Aiswarya Kaitheri 
Kandoth</a>)</li>
     
-  <li><code>nb</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-nb";>Norwegian Bokm&aring;l</a>
-(<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/att";> Andreas Tolfsen</a> - New
-coordinator needed) </li>
+  <li><code>nb</code> - <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-nb">Norwegian
+Bokm&aring;l</a> (New coordinator needed) </li>
    
-  <li><code>nl</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-nl";>Dutch</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/tuijldert";>Tom Uijldert</a>, <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/jvs";>Justin van Steijn</a>)
+  <li><code>nl</code> - <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-nl">Dutch</a> 
(<a
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/tuijldert">Tom Uijldert</a>, <a
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/jvs">Justin van Steijn</a>)
   </li>
     
-  <li><code>nn</code> - Norwegian Nynorsk (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/att";>Andreas Tolfsen</a> - New
-coordinator needed) </li>
+  <li><code>nn</code> - Norwegian Nynorsk (New coordinator needed) </li>
 
-  <li><code>pl</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-pl";>Polish</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/jsowoc";>Jan Owoc</a>) </li>
+  <li><code>pl</code> - <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-pl">Polish</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/jsowoc">Jan Owoc</a>) </li>
     
   <li><code>pt-br</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-pt-br";>Brazilian Portuguese</a>
-(<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/rafaelff1";>Rafael Fontenelle</a>) 
</li>
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-pt-br">Brazilian Portuguese</a> (<a
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/rafaelff1">Rafael Fontenelle</a>) </li>
+
+  <li><code>ro</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ro">Romanian</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/tct">Tiberiu C.  Turbureanu</a> - New
+coordinator needed) </li>
+  
+  <li><code>ru</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ru">Russian</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/jimcrow">Anatoly A.  Kazantsev</a>, <a
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/ineiev">Pavel Kharitonov</a>) </li>
 
-  <li><code>ro</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ro";>Romanian</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/tct";>Tiberiu C.  Turbureanu</a> - New
+  <li><code>sk</code> - <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-sk">Slovak</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/dominiks">Dominik Smatana</a> - New
 coordinator needed) </li>
   
-  <li><code>ru</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/www-ru";>Russian</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/jimcrow";>Anatoly A.  Kazantsev</a>, <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/ineiev";>Pavel Kharitonov</a>) </li>
-
-  <li><code>sk</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/www-sk";>Slovak</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/dominiks";>Dominik Smatana</a> - New
+  <li><code>sq</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-sq">Albanian</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/beso">Besnik Bleta</a>)</li>
+
+  <li><code>sr</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-sr">Serbian</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/Ctpajgep">Strahinya Radich</a> - New
 coordinator needed) </li>
     
-  <li><code>sq</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-sq";>Albanian</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/beso";>Besnik Bleta</a>)</li>
-
-  <li><code>sr</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-sr";>Serbian</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/Ctpajgep";>Strahinya Radich</a>) </li>
-  
-  <li><code>ta</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ta";>Tamil</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/amachutechie";>Sri Ramadoss</a> - New
+  <li><code>ta</code> - <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ta">Tamil</a> 
(<a
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/amachutechie">Sri Ramadoss</a> - New
 coordinator needed) </li>
 
-  <li><code>th</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-th";>Thai</a> (New coordinator
-needed) </li>
+  <li><code>th</code> - <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-th">Thai</a> 
(New
+coordinator needed) </li>
     
-  <li><code>tl</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-tl";>Tagalog</a> (New coordinator
-needed) </li>
+  <li><code>tl</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-tl">Tagalog</a>
+(New coordinator needed) </li>
+    
+  <li><code>tr</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-tr">Turkish</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/tekrei"> T. E. Kalaycı</a>)</li>
     
-  <li><code>tr</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-tr";>Turkish</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/tekrei";> T. E. Kalaycı</a>)</li>
-
-  <li><code>uk</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-uk";>Ukrainian</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/andriykopanytsia";>Andriy Bandura</a>)</li>
+  <li><code>uk</code> - <a 
href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-uk">Ukrainian</a>
+(<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/andriykopanytsia">Andriy Bandura</a> -
+New coordinator needed)</li>
     
   <li><code>zh-cn</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-zh-cn";>简体中文</a> (<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/wxie";> Xie Wensheng</a>) </li>
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-zh-cn">简体中文</a> (<a
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/wxie"> Xie Wensheng</a>) </li>
 
   <li><code>zh-tw</code> - <a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-zh-tw";>繁体中文</a>（<a
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/s8321414";> Po-Yen Huang</a>）</li>
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-zh-tw">繁体中文</a>（<a
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/s8321414"> Po-Yen Huang</a>）</li>
   
   <li><code>??</code> - Not available? Then this line is reserved for you.</li>
 
@@ -463,7 +424,7 @@
         README</a>. -->
 我们尽最大努力来提供精准和高质量的翻译，但难å…
ä¼šå­˜åœ¨é”™è¯¯å’Œä¸è¶³ã€‚如果您在这方面有评论或一般性的建议，请发送至
 <a
 
href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org";>&lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>。</p><p>å
…³äºŽè¿›è¡Œåè°ƒä¸Žæäº¤ç¿»è¯‘的更多信息参见
-<a href="/server/standards/README.translators.html">《译者
指南》</a>。</p>
+<a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">《译者
指南》</a>。</p>
 </div>
 
 <!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
@@ -496,12 +457,12 @@
 <b>翻译</b>：<a href="mailto:hagb_green@qq.com";>&lt;Hagb
 （郭俊余）&gt;</a>，2018-2020。<br></br>
 <b>翻译团队</b>：<a rel="team"
-href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-zh-cn/";>&lt;CTT&gt;</a>，2018-2021。</div>
+href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-zh-cn/">&lt;CTT&gt;</a>，2018-2021。</div>
 
 <p class="unprintable"><!-- timestamp start -->
 最后更新：
 
-$Date: 2021/05/19 06:59:34 $
+$Date: 2021/10/29 10:34:13 $
 
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>

Index: server/standards/po/README.translations.zh-cn-en.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/server/standards/po/README.translations.zh-cn-en.html,v
retrieving revision 1.9
retrieving revision 1.10
diff -u -b -r1.9 -r1.10
--- server/standards/po/README.translations.zh-cn-en.html       19 May 2021 
06:59:34 -0000      1.9
+++ server/standards/po/README.translations.zh-cn-en.html       29 Oct 2021 
10:34:13 -0000      1.10
@@ -7,7 +7,6 @@
 <!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
 <h2 id="guide">Guide to Translating Web Pages on
 www.gnu.org</h2>
-<div class="thin"></div>
 
 <p id="intro">Translating gnu.org with its many articles and keeping them 
updated 
 is a complex task which requires careful organization. Translators are 
@@ -379,9 +378,9 @@
 the Translations Manager for assistance if you have any doubts.</p>
 
 <h3 id="teams">Translation Teams</h3>
-<span id="TranslationsUnderway"><!--Some docs refer to this anchor--></span> 
 
-<p>Volunteers to establish new teams are more than welcome and will be
+<!--Some docs refer to this anchor-->
+<p id="TranslationsUnderway">Volunteers to establish new teams are more than 
welcome and will be
 assisted during the learning process.</p>
 
 <p>In the following list, the language code is followed by the name of the
@@ -391,100 +390,96 @@
   <!-- Please keep this list alphabetical-->
   
   <li><code>ar</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/www-ar";>Arabic</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/ka2in";>Fayçal Alami</a> - 
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ar">Arabic</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/ka2in">Fayçal Alami</a> - 
     New coordinator needed) </li>
 
-  <li><code>az</code> - Azerbaijani 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/igrar";>Igrar Huseynov</a> - 
-    New coordinator needed) </li>
+  <li><code>az</code> - Azerbaijani (New coordinator needed)</li>
     
   <li><code>bg</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-bg";>Bulgarian</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/yavor";>Yavor Doganov</a> -
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-bg">Bulgarian</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/yavor">Yavor Doganov</a> -
     New coordinator needed)</li>
  
   <li><code>bn</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-bn";>Bengali</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/suzan";>Khandakar Mujahidul
-    Islam</a> - New coordinator needed) </li>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-bn">Bengali</a> 
+    (New coordinator needed)</li>
     
   <li><code>ca</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ca";>Catalan</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/puigpe";>Miquel 
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ca">Catalan</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/puigpe">Miquel 
     Puigpelat</a> - New coordinator needed) </li>
 
   <li><code>cs</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-cs";>Czech</a>
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/franta";>František 
Kučera</a>)</li>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-cs">Czech</a>
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/franta">František Kučera</a>)</li>
     
   <li><code>da</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-da";>Danish</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/erikg";>Erik Gravgaard</a> - 
-    New coordinator needed) </li>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-da">Danish</a> 
+    (New coordinator needed) </li>
 
   <li><code>de</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-de";>German</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/joeko";>Joerg Kohne</a>)</li>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-de">German</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/joeko">Joerg Kohne</a>)</li>
   
   <li><code>el</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-el";>Greek</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/gzarkadas";>Georgios 
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-el">Greek</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/gzarkadas">Georgios 
     Zarkadas</a> - New coordinator needed) </li>
 
   <li><code>eo</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-eo";>Esperanto</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/civodul";>Ludovic 
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-eo">Esperanto</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/civodul">Ludovic 
     Court&egrave;s</a> - New coordinator needed) </li>
     
   <li><code>es</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-es";>Spanish</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/dora";>Dora Scilipoti</a>,
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/jfrtnaga";>Javier Fernández
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-es">Spanish</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/dora">Dora Scilipoti</a>,
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/jfrtnaga">Javier Fernández
     Retenaga</a>)</li>
 
   <li><code>fa</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-fa";>Farsi/Persian</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/bandali";>Amin Bandali</a>) </li>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-fa">Farsi/Persian</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/bandali">Amin Bandali</a>) </li>
     
   <li><code>fi</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-fi";>Finnish</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/solarius";>Ville</a> - New
-    coordinator needed)</li>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-fi">Finnish</a> 
+    (New coordinator needed)</li>
 
   <li><code>fr</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-fr";>French</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/barbier";>Denis Barbier</a>,
-     <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/th_g";>Thérèse Godefroy</a>)</li>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-fr">French</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/barbier">Denis Barbier</a>,
+     <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/th_g">Thérèse Godefroy</a>)</li>
     
   <li><code>he</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-he";>Hebrew</a> (New
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-he">Hebrew</a> (New
     coordinator needed) </li>
 
   <li><code>hr</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-hr";>Croatian</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/mist";>Martina Bebek</a> -
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-hr">Croatian</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/mist">Martina Bebek</a> -
     New coordinator needed)</li>
 
   <li><code>id</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-id";>Indonesian</a> 
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-id">Indonesian</a> 
     (New coordinator needed) </li>
     
   <li><code>it</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-it";>Italian</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/pescetti";>Andrea 
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-it">Italian</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/pescetti">Andrea 
     Pescetti</a>) </li>
 
   <li><code>ja</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ja";>Japanese</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/gniibe";>NIIBE Yutaka</a>)</li>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ja">Japanese</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/gniibe">NIIBE Yutaka</a>)</li>
     
   <li><code>ko</code> -
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ko";>Korean</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/blueguy";>Jongmin Yoon</a>) </li>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ko">Korean</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/blueguy">Jongmin Yoon</a> -
+    New coordinator needed) </li>
 
   <li><code>ku</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ku";>Kurdish</a> (New 
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ku">Kurdish</a> (New 
     coordinator needed) </li>
     
   <li><code>ml</code> - 
@@ -493,86 +488,83 @@
      Kandoth</a>)</li>
     
   <li><code>nb</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-nb";>Norwegian 
-    Bokm&aring;l</a> (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/att";>
-    Andreas Tolfsen</a>
-    - New coordinator needed) </li>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-nb">Norwegian 
+    Bokm&aring;l</a> (New coordinator needed) </li>
    
   <li><code>nl</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-nl";>Dutch</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/tuijldert";>Tom Uijldert</a>,
-     <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/jvs";>Justin van Steijn</a>)
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-nl">Dutch</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/tuijldert">Tom Uijldert</a>,
+     <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/jvs">Justin van Steijn</a>)
   </li>
     
   <li><code>nn</code> - Norwegian Nynorsk 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/att";>Andreas Tolfsen</a>
-    - New coordinator needed) </li>
+    (New coordinator needed) </li>
 
   <li><code>pl</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-pl";>Polish</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/jsowoc";>Jan Owoc</a>) </li>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-pl">Polish</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/jsowoc">Jan Owoc</a>) </li>
     
   <li><code>pt-br</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-pt-br";>Brazilian
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-pt-br">Brazilian
     Portuguese</a>
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/rafaelff1";>Rafael Fontenelle</a>) 
</li>
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/rafaelff1">Rafael Fontenelle</a>) </li>
 
   <li><code>ro</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ro";>Romanian</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/tct";>Tiberiu C.
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ro">Romanian</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/tct">Tiberiu C.
     Turbureanu</a> - New coordinator needed) </li>
   
   <li><code>ru</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/www-ru";>Russian</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/jimcrow";>Anatoly A. 
-    Kazantsev</a>, <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/ineiev";>Pavel  
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ru">Russian</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/jimcrow">Anatoly A. 
+    Kazantsev</a>, <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/ineiev">Pavel  
     Kharitonov</a>) </li>
 
   <li><code>sk</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/www-sk";>Slovak</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/dominiks";>Dominik Smatana</a> 
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-sk">Slovak</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/dominiks">Dominik Smatana</a> 
     - New coordinator needed) </li>
     
   <li><code>sq</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-sq";>Albanian</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/beso";>Besnik Bleta</a>)</li>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-sq">Albanian</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/beso">Besnik Bleta</a>)</li>
 
   <li><code>sr</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-sr";>Serbian</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/Ctpajgep";>Strahinya 
-    Radich</a>) </li>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-sr">Serbian</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/Ctpajgep">Strahinya 
+    Radich</a> - New coordinator needed) </li>
   
   <li><code>ta</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ta";>Tamil</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/amachutechie";>Sri 
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-ta">Tamil</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/amachutechie">Sri 
     Ramadoss</a> - New coordinator needed) </li>
 
   <li><code>th</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-th";>Thai</a> (New 
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-th">Thai</a> (New 
     coordinator needed) </li>
     
   <li><code>tl</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-tl";>Tagalog</a> (New 
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-tl">Tagalog</a> (New 
     coordinator needed) </li>
     
   <li><code>tr</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-tr";>Turkish</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/tekrei";>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-tr">Turkish</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/tekrei">
     T. E. Kalaycı</a>)</li>
 
   <li><code>uk</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-uk";>Ukrainian</a> 
-    (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/andriykopanytsia";>Andriy
-    Bandura</a>)</li>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-uk">Ukrainian</a> 
+    (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/andriykopanytsia">Andriy
+    Bandura</a> - New coordinator needed)</li>
     
   <li><code>zh-cn</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-zh-cn";>Simplified
-    Chinese</a> (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/wxie";>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-zh-cn">Simplified
+    Chinese</a> (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/wxie">
     Xie Wensheng</a>) </li>
 
   <li><code>zh-tw</code> - 
-    <a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-zh-tw";>Traditional
-    Chinese</a> (<a href="https://savannah.gnu.org/users/s8321414";>
+    <a href="//savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-zh-tw">Traditional
+    Chinese</a> (<a href="//savannah.gnu.org/users/s8321414">
     Po-Yen Huang</a>)</li>
   
   <li><code>??</code> - Not available? Then this line is reserved for 
@@ -648,7 +640,7 @@
 
 <p class="unprintable">Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2021/05/19 06:59:34 $
+$Date: 2021/10/29 10:34:13 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>

Index: server/standards/po/README.translations.zh-cn.po
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/server/standards/po/README.translations.zh-cn.po,v
retrieving revision 1.37
retrieving revision 1.38
diff -u -b -r1.37 -r1.38
--- server/standards/po/README.translations.zh-cn.po    29 Oct 2021 10:08:56 
-0000      1.37
+++ server/standards/po/README.translations.zh-cn.po    29 Oct 2021 10:34:13 
-0000      1.38
@@ -15,7 +15,6 @@
 "MIME-Version: 1.0\n"
 "Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8\n"
 "Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit\n"
-"X-Outdated-Since: 2021-10-29 06:25+0000\n"
 
 #. type: Content of: <title>
 msgid ""
@@ -511,8 +510,8 @@
 "Web Translators Manual</cite>."
 msgstr ""
 "特殊规则参见在<cite>《GNU Web Translators Manual》</cite>中的<a 
href=\"/"
-"software/trans-coord/manual/web-trans/html_node/Distribution-Terms.html"
-"\">《Distribution Terms》</a>"
+"software/trans-coord/manual/web-trans/html_node/Distribution-Terms.html\">"
+"《Distribution Terms》</a>"
 
 #. type: Content of: <h4>
 msgid "What to Translate"

Index: philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn.html
===================================================================
RCS file: philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn.html
diff -N philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn.html
--- /dev/null   1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn.html    29 Oct 2021 10:34:12 
-0000      1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,712 @@
+<!--#set var="ENGLISH_PAGE" 
value="/philosophy/danger-of-software-patents.en.html" -->
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.zh-cn.html" -->
+<!-- Parent-Version: 1.96 -->
+<!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html -->
+<!--#set var="TAGS" value="speeches" -->
+<!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" -->
+
+<!-- This file is automatically generated by GNUnited Nations! -->
+<title>软件专利之危险 - GNU 工程 - 自由软件基金会</title>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.zh-cn.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.zh-cn.html" -->
+<!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.zh-cn.html" -->
+<div class="article reduced-width">
+<h2>软件专利之危险</h2>
+
+<address class="byline"><a 
href="https://www.stallman.org/";>理查德·斯托曼</a> 著</address>
+
+<div class="infobox">
+<p>这是 2009 年 10 月 8 日 
在威灵顿的维多利亚大学所作演讲的笔录。</p>
+</div>
+<hr class="thin" />
+
+<dl>
+<dt>SF:</dt>
+<dd><p>我叫 Susy Frankel。以 Meredith Kolsky Lewis
+和我自己的名义，欢迎你们来到本次研讨会。ç 
”讨会由新西兰国际经济法中心主办。Brenda Chawner
+作为维多利亚大学信息管理学院的成员，而不是法律中心教职工的成员，实é™
…上负责让 Richard Stallman
+回到新西兰并安排他在新西兰的巡回演讲，包括今晚在惠
灵顿的一站。不过很遗憾，她此时此刻不能和大家在一起，å›
 ä¸ºå¥¹è¿˜åœ¨æŽˆè¯¾ã€‚</p>
+
+<p>因此，由我高兴地欢迎大家来听 
&ldquo;软件专利之危险&rdquo;。Richard Stallman 
提议了一整套讲座，在与 Brenda
+商讨之后，我选择此次的讲题，正是因为在新西å…
°åŽ†å²ä¸Šï¼Œæˆ‘们第一次真正有了一次持久的、但是重要的å…
³äºŽä¸“利法改革的讨论，而在座的很多人都负责å…
¶ä¸­è½¯ä»¶ä¸“利的讨论。所以，这次讲座非常切题，也非常及时。感谢
+Richard，提议了这个话题。</p>
+
+<p>简单介绍一下 Richard 
Stallman。尽管有些人以前没有听说过，Richard 开启了 GNU 
操作系统的开发。我以前从未听说过 GNU，我到
+YouTube（没有 YouTube 怎么办）&hellip;&hellip;</p></dd>
+
+<dt>RMS:</dt>
+<dd>不，你不要推荐 YouTube，因为他们分发的是专利æ 
¼å¼çš„视频。</dd>
+
+<dt>SF:</dt>
+<dd>提醒得好。我提到它只是要问你是说 G&nbsp;N&nbsp;U，还是 
GNU？</dd>
+
+<dt>RMS:</dt>
+<dd>Wikipedia 上有说明。[答案是，它按一个音节发音，带有 G 
的音。]</dd>
+
+<dt>SF:</dt>
+<dd>是的，但是我在 YouTube 上听到你
亲自说了。不过，重点是 GNU 
不是私有的。而最有意思的重点是 Richard
+因此获得了许多荣誉。我最喜欢其中一个奖项，因
此我要说一下，就是 Takeda Award for Social and Economic
+Betterment，我想我们今晚会听到不少东西，所以我们一起来欢迎
 Richard。</dd>
+
+<dt>RMS:</dt>
+<dd><p>首先，我说一下我喝这个 [一罐 cola，不是 coke]
+的一个原因，就是现在全世界正在抵制可口可乐公司，因
为它谋杀了哥伦比亚州的工会组织者。请访问网站 <a
+href="http://killercoke.org";>killercoke.org</a>。他们说得不是喝可乐的效果&mdash;&mdash;毕竟，很多产品的效果都差不多&mdash;&mdash;而是谋杀è€
…。因此，在你购买饮料时，请看清楚它不是可口可乐å…
¬å¸çš„产品。</p>
+
+<p>å…
³äºŽæˆ‘，人们知道最多的就是我开始了自由软件运动并领导了 
GNU 操作系统的开发&mdash;&mdash;虽然大多数使用 GNU
+的人错误地认为自己使用的是 Linux 并且认为那是别人在 10
+年后开始的。但是我今天不会讲这些。我在这里要讲的是一个法律危险，它对所有软件开发è€
…、发行者
和用户都是危险：专利的危险&mdash;&mdash;计算想法的专利、计算技术的专利、使用计算机的专利。</p>
+
+<p>要理解这个问题，你首先要意识到专利法和版权法毫无å…
³ç³»&mdash;&mdash;它们完全不同。你对其中之一的了解，完å…
¨ä¸é€‚用于另一个。</p>
+
+<p>例如，如果有人声称 &ldquo;知识产权，&rdquo; 
那么就是在把水搅混，因
为这是在把两种乃至多种法律混在一起。这些法律都是不同的，结果就是对于
+&ldquo;知识产权&rdquo;
+的任何论调只是导致混乱&mdash;&mdash;不是发表论调的人自己糊涂，就是他企图迷惑别人。æ—
 è®ºå¦‚何，有意也好，无意也罢，总之是一团糟。</p>
+
+<p>请在你的论述中避å…
ä½¿ç”¨è¯¥æœ¯è¯­ï¼Œä»¥é˜²è¢«è¯¯è§£ã€‚如果要对这些法律做出有深度和æ¸
…析的评论，那么唯一的办法就是首å…
ˆè¦æ˜Žç¡®åŒºåˆ†è¿™äº›æ³•å¾‹ï¼Œè®¨è®ºå…¶ä¸­æŸä¸ªå…
·ä½“的法律，如此我们就能够明白它究竟是做什么的、然后再对它做出结论。我下面会谈及专利法，并讨论在å
…è®¸ä¸“利法限制软件的国家都发生了什么事。</p>
+
+<p>专利做什么?
+专利是一个明确的、由政府颁发的、对某种想法的垄断。在专利中，有一个部分叫权利要求，它就是要描述ä½
 ä¸èƒ½åšçš„事（虽然其描述方式你
很难看懂）。弄明白专利禁止你
做的事是什么很令人头痛，而且这些描述打印出来可能是厚厚的一沓。</p>
+
+<p>专利通常 20 年有效，这对软件来说是相当长的时间。20 
年前还没有互连网&mdash;&mdash;现在大量计算机进入了一个 20
+年前还无法设想的领域。因此 20
+年来人们在此做的事当然都是新东西&mdash;&mdash;至少在某些方面是新东西。如果那时已经申请了专利，则我们就被禁止做这些新东西了，所有这些新东西都要在那些愚è
 ¢åˆ°ä¼šæ‹¥æœ‰è½¯ä»¶ä¸“利政策的国家被禁止了。</p>
+
+<p>大多数情
况下，当人们描述专利系统的功能时，他们对此系统有着明确的利益。他们有的是专利律师，或è€
…是在专利办å…
¬å®¤å·¥ä½œï¼Œä¹Ÿå¯èƒ½æ˜¯åœ¨å¤§ä¼ä¸šçš„专利部门上班，因
此他们很想让你也喜欢专利系统。</p>
+
+<p><cite>经济学家</cite> 杂志曾经把专利系统比做
+&ldquo;一个时间彩票&rdquo;。如果你见到过å…
¬å¼€å‘行的彩票，那么你
应该知道它如何运作：他们会强调那个几
率奇小的大奖，而不会谈论几乎注定会输的大概率。这æ 
·åšï¼Œä»–们就有意识地为你呈现出一幅你
会中大奖的画面，而不用说任何谎言。</p>
+
+<p>专利系统也是这么做公关的：他们会谈到å…
œé‡Œæ£ç€ä¸€ä¸ªä¸“利走在大街上的感觉&mdash;&mdash;或者å…
ˆè¯´ï¼ŒèŽ·å¾—专利是什么感觉，然后再说å…
œé‡Œæœ‰ä¸“利是什么感觉，通常是说你可以从å…
œé‡ŒæŽå‡ºä¸“利并对人说，&ldquo;现在掏钱吧。&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>为了对付这些倾向性，我决定从另一个方面来看，从受害è€
…的一方来看&mdash;&mdash;那些想开发、传
播和运行软件的人们会怎么看专利呢。你肯定会担
心有一天某人上门来并掏出一份专利对你
说，&ldquo;现在交钱吧。&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>如果你在一个有软件专利的国家开发软件，而你要é…
åˆä¸“利法，你该怎么办?</p>
+
+<p>在你要写程序时，你
可以试着把人们能在此程序中看到的想法都列出来，当然除了那些ä½
 åœ¨å¼€å§‹å†™ä¹‹å‰è¿˜ä¸çŸ¥é“的想法。[但是]即使在你
写完之后，你也做不出这个列表。</p>
+
+<p>原因就是&hellip;在你以某种方式构想程序时&mdash;&mdash;你
的大脑已经开始应用你的构想。正因如此，你很难看到å…
¶ä»–人可能看待该程序的结构&mdash;&mdash;程序对你
来说不是新鲜出炉的，你在脑子里已经有了它的结构。å…
¶ä»–人可能是第一次，他们可能会有不同的结构，其中也会包
含新的想法，而你
要看到别人有什么想法是很难的。但是，不管怎æ 
·ç¨‹åºå·²ç»å®žçŽ°äº†ï¼Œå¦‚果这些想法已经有了专利，那么这些专利就会禁止ä½
 çš„程序。</p>
+
+<p>例如，假设有一些图形图像想法的专利，而你
要画一个正方形。然后，你发现如果专利是关于底边的，你
就没法画正方形了。你会把 &ldquo;底边&rdquo;
+放到你的画图软件的想法列表里。但是你
没注意到另外有人关于底角的专利也很容意对你
有法律影响，因为这个人会把图旋转 45
+度。这样你的正方形就边成这样了，它有了一个底角。</p>
+
+<p>所以说，你没有办法列出所有会禁止你
的程序的专利思想。</p>
+
+<p>你也许可以做的是列出你
程序涉及的所有已经申请过的专利思想。但是由于专利申请至少会保密
 18
+个月，而专利事务所也不会告诉你
他们会批准哪些专利，所以列出已有专利也行不通。这个想法只是理论上可行，没有实é™
…操作性。</p>
+
+<p>例如，Compress 程序写于 1984 年，这是一个使用 <abbr 
title="Lempel-Ziv-Welch">LZW</abbr>
+数据压缩算法的文件压缩程序。当时并没有该算法用于文件压缩的专利。程序作è€
…
是从杂志上获得该算法的。那个时代，计算机科学杂志就是来发表算法让人们使用的。</p>
+
+<p>作者完成了程序，发布了程序，而在 1985
+å¹´å…
³äºŽè¯¥ç®—法的专利被批准了。但是该专利的持有人很狡猾，他没有立即告诉人们停止使用该算法和程序。他在想，&ldquo;让大家把坟坑挖得更深一些。&rdquo;å‡
 å¹´åŽï¼Œä¸“利持有人开始威胁大家，我们明白了不能再用
+Compress，所以我请大家推荐其他可用的算法来压缩文件。</p>
+
+<p>有人写信说，&ldquo;我开发了另一种更好的压缩算法，也写了程序，我想把它给ä½
 ã€‚&rdquo;因
此我们准备发布该软件，就在要发布的一周前，我不经意看了
+<cite>纽约时报</cite>
+的每周专利专栏，å…
¶å®žæˆ‘很少看&mdash;&mdash;一年也就可能看一两次&mdash;&mdash;但就是那么巧，我看到有人获得一个å
…³äºŽ
+&ldquo;发明压缩数据方法&rdquo;
+的专利。我说我们最好查一下这个专利，果不å…
¶ç„¶ï¼Œè¿™ä¸ªä¸“利覆盖到我们要发布的程序。但是事情
也可能更糟糕：这个专利如果晚了一年公开，或者
晚了两年，甚至晚了五年呢?</p>
+
+<p>无论如何，最后另外有人有了更好的压缩算法，并用于 
gzip 程序，而大家基本上都开始使用
+gzip，所以结局是皆大欢喜。不过，先别高兴得太早，还有故
事在后面。</p>
+
+<p>所以，你无法了解到哪些专利会出来阻止你
的作品，但是你可以了解哪些已经公开的专利会对你
有影响。它们都公开在专利事务所。问题是太多了，你
看不过来。</p>
+
+<p>在美国，我想会有几
十万量级的软件专利，跟踪这些专利是艰巨的任务。所以你
要检索的是相关的专利，你会找到很多相关的专利，但是你
不必全都找到。</p>
+
+<p>例如，在 80 年代和 90 年代，有个专利是关于电子表格的
+&ldquo;自然计算顺序&rdquo;。有人曾经问我要一份，我到电脑里查看了专利号。然后，我按ç
…§å·ç 
ä»ŽæŠ½å±‰é‡Œæ‰¾åˆ°çº¸è´¨ç‰ˆå¹¶ç”¨å¤å°æœºå‘给他。他收到后说，&ldquo;ä½
 å‘给我的专利是错的。你这个是å…
³äºŽç¼–译器的。&rdquo;我觉得可能是我们的文件号错了。我又查了一遍，它明确地说，&ldquo;把å
…¬å¼ç¼–译为目标代码的方法。&rdquo;我开始阅
读该专利来确定它是否真的是错了。我阅
读了权利要求，很明确它就是自然计算顺序的专利，但是它并未使用这个术语。它没有使用
+&ldquo;电子表格&rdquo; 这个术语。实际
上，该专利禁止的是十几
种实现拓扑排序的方法，是他们可以想到的所有方法。不过，我觉得他们也没有使用
+&ldquo;拓扑排序&rdquo; 这个术语。</p>
+
+<p>如果你要写一个电子表格，而你要搜索相关专利，你
可能会发现大量的专利。但是在你告知他人之前，你
也许找不到上面的专利，&ldquo;我在写一个电子表æ 
¼ï¼Œ&rdquo;他说，&ldquo;你知不知道有哪些制做电子表格的å…
¬å¸è¢«æŽ§å‘Šäº†å—?&rdquo;然后你就知道问题了。</p>
+
+<p>你无法搜索到全部专利，但是你可以找到很多。然后，你
需要弄明白它们的含义，这很难，因
为专利是用烦琐的法律术语写成的，非常难弄明白å…
¶å«ä¹‰ã€‚因此你要花费大量时间和昂贵的律师讨论你
要做什么，以便弄明白你可以做什么。</p>
+
+<p>即使专利持有人通常也不能立马看出自己的专利意味着什么。例如，有个叫
 Paul Heckel
+的人发布了一个在小屏幕显示很多数据的程序，å…
¶ä¸­å¾ˆå¤šæƒ³æ³•èŽ·å¾—了几个专利。</p>
+
+<p>我曾经要弄明白该专利的要求 
1，想要用简单的语言描述它。我发现我无
法找到更简单的语言来描术，而专利使用的语句我竟无
法一下子放到脑子里，无论多么努力。</p>
+
+<p>Heckel 自己也稿不明白，因为当他看到 HyperCard 
时，他并没有看到它的程序里有这些东西。他并不知道他的专利会写成
 HyperCard
+的样子;但那是律师的主意，这样他威胁到了 
Apple。然后，他又威胁到了 Apple 的客户，最终 Apple
+和他达成了密秘和解，而我们并不知道谁是最后的赢家。这只是一个人们想知道专利å
…è®¸ä»€ä¹ˆå’Œä¸å…è®¸ä»€ä¹ˆçš„例子。</p>
+
+<p>事实上，有次我演讲的时候 Heckel
+正好在下面听。说到这里的时候，他跳出来说，&ldquo;不对，我只是不知道保护的范围。&rdquo;我就说，&ldquo;是的，这正是我讲的，&rdquo;这时他坐下来，而那就是我最后被
+Heckel 
干扰的经历。如果我那时说得是不，那么他可能还会和我争论。</p>
+
+<p>无论如何，你
和律师进行了长时间的昂贵讨论之后，律师大概会这样说:</p>
+
+<blockquote><p>如果你在这方面做了些东西，那么你
差不多一定会输掉案子; 如果你在那方面做了事情，那么你
有很大可能性输掉官司;
+如果你要保证安全，那么你
不能涉足这个领域。但是对任何案件你
都有点侥幸的胜机。</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>现在你有了清晰的、可预见的商业规则，你该如何实际
操做呢?
+针对任何专利你都可以做三件事情
。一是避开该专利，二是获取å…
¶ä¸“利许可，三是让这个专利失效。我会一个一个来讲。</p>
+
+<p>首å…
ˆï¼Œæœ‰å¯èƒ½é¿å¼€æŸä¸ªä¸“利的，就是说，不要实现该专利禁止的东西。当然，如果很难辨认该专利禁止什么，那么怎么来避开就æ—
 ä»Žè°ˆèµ·ã€‚</p>
+
+<p>几年前，Kodak 起诉 Sun 使用了其面向对象相关的专利，而 
Sun 不认为自己侵权。法庭的决定是侵权成立;
+而其他人阅
读该专利时并不能看出侵权是否成立。没人可以判断该专利å…
è®¸ä»€ä¹ˆå’Œç¦æ­¢ä»€ä¹ˆï¼Œä½†æ˜¯ Sun 
就是为此不可理解的法律支付了几千万美元。</p>
+
+<p>有时你可以判断需要避免哪些东西，有些时候你要避å…
çš„是一种算法。</p>
+
+<p>例如，我看到过一个类似快速富里叶变化的专利，但是速度快了
 2 倍。那么如果普通的 FFT
+对你的应用已经够快，那么你避å…
è¯¥ç®—法就可以了。大多数情况下，这些都可以成功。如果你
使用普通 FFT
+会运行很久，而更快速的算法会刚好够用。那么你
就不能避免快速算法，虽然你也能再等几
年使用更快的计算机。但是那太不寻常了。大多数情
况下，专利会被轻易避免。</p>
+
+<p>另一方面，关于算法的专利也可能很难避免。想一想 LZW
+数据压缩算法。如我解释过的，我们找到一个更好的数据压缩算法，使用文件压缩的人都开始使用å
…·æœ‰æ›´å¥½ç®—法的 gzip
+程序。原因是，如果你只是要压缩和解压文件，那么你
可以告诉人们你使用的是哪个程序; 然后你å…
³å¿ƒçš„就只是算法如何。</p>
+
+<p>但是 LZW 也用在其他地方; 比如 PostScript 语言也有 LZW
+压缩和解压的操作。使用别的更好算法就没用了，因为æ 
¼å¼ä¸åŒã€‚它们不能兼容。如果你使用 gzip 压缩，那么你
就不能用 LZW
+解压。无论算法多好，无论它是什么，它不能按照规格实现 
PostScript。</p>
+
+<p>但是我知道用户很少让打印机去压缩东西。一般来说，人们只会让打印机解压;我也知道两个
 LZW
+算法的专利的描述都是说如果你
的系统只解压，那么是不被禁止的。这些专利只管压缩，也有å
…¶ä»–专利既管压缩也管解压;但是没有专利只管解压。因
此，我知道如果我们只实现
+LZW 解压，那么我们是安全的。虽然没有满足需求规æ 
¼ï¼Œä½†æ˜¯å¯ä»¥æ»¡è¶³ç”¨æˆ·;因为它做了用户所需。我们刚刚好避å…
äº†ä¸¤ä¸ªä¸“利。</p>
+
+<p>还有图像的 GIF 格式。它也用 LZW 算法。人们没过多久
就有定义了另一种图像格式，就是 PNG，意思是 &ldquo;PNG's Not
+GIF（PNG 非 GIF）&rdquo;。我认为它用的是 gzip 
算法。我们开始对人说，&ldquo;不要使用 GIF æ 
¼å¼ï¼Œå®ƒæ˜¯å±é™©çš„。请切换到
+PNG。&rdquo;用户说，&ldquo;以后吧，现在浏览器还没有实现这个算法呢，&rdquo;而浏览器开发è€
…
说，&ldquo;我们未来会实现的，但是现在用户并没有这方面的需求。&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>你看，发生的事情很明显&mdash;&mdash;GIF
+是实际标准。要求大家切换到另一个不同的æ 
¼å¼ï¼Œè€Œä¸æ˜¯çŽ°æœ‰çš„实际标准，就象让所有新西å…
°äººè¯´åŒˆç‰™åˆ©è¯­ã€‚人们会说，&ldquo;好啊，大家都说匈牙利语的时候，我就学ä¹
 ã€‚&rdquo;我们让人停止使用
+GIF 的努力从未成功，即使其中一个专利持有者
在检查网站操作者，并威胁要起诉他们，除非这些操作者
可以证明网站的所有 GIF 都有授权软件。</p>
+
+<p>GIF 
对大部分社区都是一个危险的陷井。我们曾认为我们有了 GIF 
格式的替代，就是
+JPEG，不过有人说，&ldquo;我查找了我的专利&rdquo;&mdash;&mdash;我觉得有人只是购买专利并要使用它们威胁人们&mdash;&mdash;他又说，&ldquo;我发现å
…¶ä¸­ä¸€ä¸ªåŒ…含有
+JPEG 格式。&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>JPEG 不是实际标准，它是一个正式标准，由一个æ 
‡å‡†ç»„织发布的; 
该组织也有一个律师。这个律师认为该专利实际并没有包括 
JPEG 格式。</p>
+
+<p>那么谁说得是对的呢?该专利持有者已经起诉了好多å…
¬å¸ï¼Œå¦‚果有了判决，那么就有了结论。但是，我没有听到判决;我也不确定是否有一个判决。我认为他们和解了，而和解å‡
 ä¹Žæ€»æ˜¯ç§˜å¯†çš„，就是说不会告诉大家谁对谁错。</p>
+
+<p>这些还是相对简单的案子：JPEG 的一个专利，LZW 
算法的两个专利用在 GIF。你
可能思考为什么同一个算法会有两个专利?
+本来不应该这样，但事实就是这样。原因
是专利审查员可能没有时间研究和对比两个专利的不同，因
为他们不被允许花那么多时间。而且因为算法只是数学，你
基本没有办法对一个应用和专利进行比较。</p>
+
+<p>在物理工程领域，他们可以通过物理特性详查。例如，对化学工程，他们可以说，&ldquo;输å
…¥ç‰©è´¨æ˜¯ä»€ä¹ˆ? 输出物质是什么?&rdquo;如果不同 [专利]
+应用在这些方面有不同，那么它们就不是相同的过程，你
也就不用担
心。但是同一个的数学可能会有非常不同的表达，除非你
把两者一起研究，你不会意识到它们是同样的原理。因
此，[软件]
+上有很多同样的东西获得了多次专利。</p>
+
+<p>还记得那个还没有发布就被专利杀死的程序吗?
+那个算法也被授予了两次专利。在这么小的领域我们就看到了来两个案例&mdash;&mdash;同一个算法有两个专利。我也向大家解释了原å›
 ã€‚</p>
+
+<p>但是一两个专利还是简单案例。如果是 MPEG2 这样的视频æ 
¼å¼åˆä¼šæ€Žæ ·? 我看到关于它的一个超过 70
+个专利的单子，授权这些专利花费的时间比开发这个æ 
‡å‡†çš„时间还长。JPEG
+委员会还要开发一个后续æ 
‡å‡†ï¼ŒåŽæ¥æ”¾å¼ƒäº†ã€‚他们说那里已经有了太多专利了;已经没有办法再做了。</p>
+
+<p>有时专利是一项功能，避å…
è¿™ç§ä¸“利的唯一方法是不开发该功能。例如，Xywrite
+文字处理程序的用户有次收到降级软件的邮件，这是要移除一个功能。该功能是可以定义缩写列表。比如，如果ä½
 å®šä¹‰ &ldquo;exp&rdquo; 为
+&ldquo;experiment&rdquo; 的缩写，那么如果你输入 
&ldquo;exp-space&ldquo; 或
+&ldquo;exp-comma&rdquo;，&ldquo;exp&rdquo; 就会自动变为 
&ldquo;experiment&rdquo;。</p>
+
+<p>那时，有人用专利威胁他们，他们考虑到唯一的事就是把该功能去掉。å›
 æ­¤ï¼Œä»–们让所有的用户降级。</p>
+
+<p>但是他们也联系了我，因为我的 Emacs 编辑器在 70 
年代末就有了这种功能。它写在 Emacs
+的手册里，因此他们觉得这æ 
·å¯èƒ½ä¼šå¸®åŠ©ä»–们使该专利失效。我很高å…
´çŸ¥é“我至少有了一个可以申请专利的想法，但是我对å…
¶ä»–人申请了此专利很不满。</p>
+
+<p>不幸的是，事实上，该专利失效了，部分原因
就是我更早发布了该功能这个有力的事实。但是同时他们也不得不移除该功能。</p>
+
+<p>移除一两个功能可能并不是灾难。但是如果需要移除 50 
个功能，虽然可以做，但人们会说，&ldquo;这个程序不行;
+我要的功能都没有啊。&rdquo;所以它不解决问题。有的专利覆盖的面太广，它们会毁坏一个领域，就象å
…¬é’¥åŠ å¯†çš„专利那样，它实际上让公钥加密推后了十年之久
。</p>
+
+<p>这就是避å…
ä¸“利的一个结果&mdash;&mdash;有时虽然可能，但是你要知道你
能避免的专利的极限数目。</p>
+
+<p>那么另一个可能性，获取专利许可怎么样呢?</p>
+
+<p>专利持有者也可能不给你许可。这完å…
¨ç”±ä»–决定。他会说，&ldquo;我就是要你完蛋。&rdquo;
+我有次收到一封来自做家庭赌博游戏生意者
的来信，这些东西当然是和计算机联系在一起的，而他被一个专利持有è€
…威胁说要让他å…
³é—¨ã€‚他把那个专利发给我。专利的第一个要求是
+&ldquo;一个由多个计算机组成的网络，å…
¶ä¸­æ¯ä¸ªè®¡ç®—机都支持多å…
ƒæ¸¸æˆï¼Œå¹¶ä½¿è¿™ä¸ªæ¸¸æˆçš„多个会话同时进行&rdquo;。</p>
+
+<p>我确信在 1980
+年代有个大学已经搭建起了服务器网络室，而且每个服务器都有某种窗口应用。他们只需安è£
…
多人游戏就有可能同时显示多人游戏的会话。这种技术太简单太没有意义，而没人会为此发表文ç«
 ï¼Œä½†æ˜¯å´æœ‰ä¸“利价值。如果你
碰巧有这种简单东西的专利权，那么你也可能让你
的竟争对手倒闭。</p>
+
+<p>但是为什么专利局会为如此可笑和简单的东西颁发众多专利?</p>
+
+<p>不是因为专里审查员太笨，而是因为他们就是按ç…
§ç³»ç»Ÿæ‰§è¡Œçš„，系统有系统的规则，这些规则导致了这些结果。</p>
+
+<p>如果一个人造
了一台机器，能够做一次某事，而另一个人也造
了台机器，能够作 N 
此那件事，那么对我们来说这不过是一个
+<code>for</code>-循环，而对专利局这个就是发明。再比如，如果有台机器可以做
 A，另一台机器可以做 B，有人设计了既可以做 A 又可以做
+B 的机器，那么对我们来说这个不过是一个 
<code>if-then-else</code>
+判断，而对专利局这个又是发明。因此，æ 
‡å‡†å¾ˆä½Žï¼Œè€Œä¸”他们又按照标准执行，这æ 
·ä¸€æ¥å°±å¯¼è‡´æœ‰äº›ä¸“利看起来很可笑、很平凡。它们是否有效，我就不能判断了。但是，看到这些专利的程序员都笑了。</p>
+
+<p>不管怎样，我无法为他提供任何建议，而他不得不å…
³é—¨äº†äº‹ã€‚但是大多数专利持有者会给你
许可。它可能会很贵。</p>
+
+<p>但是有些软件开发者发现获得专利特别简单，多数情
况下。他们是超级企业。在许多领域，超
级企业通常都拥有大约一半的专利，并且他们互相交叉授权，他们可以和任何å
…¶ä»–企业交叉授权，只要你
有东西拿出来。结果就是他们毫不费力地有了差不多所有专利的许可。</p>
+
+<p>IBM 在其内部杂志，<cite>Think</cite> 
杂志中&mdash;&mdash;我记得是 1990 年第 5
+期&mdash;&mdash;谈到它从当时自己拥有的大约 9,000 
个美国专利（现在超过了 45,000
+个）中获得的好处。å…
¶ä¸­ä¸€ä¸ªæ˜¯æ”¶å–专利费，不过主要的好处，可能比专利费要高一个数量级，是
 &ldquo;获得其他人的专利许可，&rdquo;就是交叉授权。</p>
+
+<p>这就是说由于 IBM 有这么多专利，它几
乎可以和任何人达成交叉授权，这样 IBM 就可以避å…
ç»å¤§å¤šæ•°ä¸“利的不利影响。这就是为什么 IBM
+想要软件专利。这也是为什么超
级企业一般都想要软件专利，因
为他们知道通过交叉授权，他们能够坐在山顶独享风景。而我们这些人只能å¾
…在下面，无法上来。如果你是个天才，你或许能开个å…
¬å¸ï¼Œå¼„些专利，但是你无法进入
+IBM 的阵营，无论你怎么努力都不行。</p>
+
+<p>许多å…
¬å¸ä¼šå‘Šè¯‰ä»–们的员工，&ldquo;为我们获取一些专利来保护自己&rdquo;，他们指的是，&ldquo;用这些专利争取交叉授权，&rdquo;但是这并不顺利。如果它们只有少量专利的话，这个方法不怎么有效。</p>
+
+<p>假设你
有个专利，这里一个，那里一个。有人用一个专利指向你
。你的三个专利根本帮不上，因
为它们没有指向那个人。另一方面，早晚你å…
¬å¸ä¼šå‘现一个专利指到了某个人，你
可能会威胁这个人并压榨些钱财&mdash;&mdash;不管这人是否攻击了ä½
 å…¬å¸ã€‚</p>
+
+<p>因此，如果你公司对你
说，&ldquo;我们需要专利来保护自己，请获得一些专利，&rdquo;那么我建议ä½
 è¿™ä¹ˆè¯´ï¼š</p>
+
+<blockquote><p>老板，我相信你，我知道你
只会用这些专利来保护公司。但是我不知道 5 
年后谁会是这个公司的
+CEO。据我所知，它有可能被微软收购。所以，除非有书面承诺，我真的不能相信å
…¬å¸åªä¼šç”¨ä¸“利自保的话。请书面保证我为å…
¬å¸æä¾›çš„专利只会用来自卫和安全，而不会用于压制，这æ 
·æˆ‘就能够在清晰的共识之下为公司获得专利。</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>如果不只私下和老板提出此事，而是在å…
¬å¸å±‚面讨论此事就更有意义了。</p>
+
+<p>另一件事是公司可能会失败，然后其资产会被拍卖，包
括专利; 而这些专利会被别有用心的人购卖去做恶事。</p>
+
+<p>因
此理解交叉授权的实践活动非常重要，这是洞穿软件专利推动è€
…
论调的利器，这些人总是说软件专利是保护计算机天才不被饿死的å¿
…要措施。他们还会向你展示一个包
含一系列不可能的场景。</p>
+
+<p>我们来细看一下。æ 
¹æ®ä»–们的场景，有一个天才经过多年的独立工作发现了一个好东西，它è¶
…过了所有类似的产品。有了这个东西，天才想开始自己的å…
¬å¸å¹¶è¦å¤§è§„模生产这个东西;
+因为产品非常好，他的å…
¬å¸æœ€ç»ˆä¼šéžå¸¸æˆåŠŸ;&mdash;&mdash;除了一件事：大å…
¬å¸ä¼šå’Œä»–竟争并夺取其全部市场。因此，天才的å…
¬å¸å½“然会失败，然后天才就失去了饭碗。</p>
+
+<p>现在，我们来看看所有这些不可能的假设。</p>
+
+<p>首å…
ˆï¼Œä»–的想法是他独立做出产品。这基本不可能。在高科技行业，大多数进步都是由在同一领域的人互相讨论并认真工作做出的。但是我不能说不可能，一个人独立成事的可能性很小。</p>
+
+<p>第二条假设是他开始自己的公司并获得成功。可是，仅仅
是一个天才工程师并不能让他善长运营公司。大多数新å…
¬å¸ä¼šå¤±è´¥; 我了解，超过 95%
+的新公司在几年内就失败了。因此，不管怎æ 
·ï¼Œæœ€å¯èƒ½çš„事就是他的公司会失败。</p>
+
+<p>再假设，天才不但善于工程，独立ç 
”发了优秀的产品，而且很会管理å…
¬å¸ã€‚如果他非常善于经营，那么å…
¬å¸å¯èƒ½ä¸ä¼šå¤±è´¥ã€‚毕竟不是所有的å…
¬å¸éƒ½ä¼šå¤±è´¥ï¼Œè¿˜æ˜¯æœ‰æŸäº›å…
¬å¸ä¼šæˆåŠŸã€‚如果他有经营头脑，那么他不会和大å…
¬å¸å¯¹ç€å¹²ï¼Œè€Œæ˜¯å¯èƒ½åšå¥½é‚£äº›å°å…¬å¸å–„长的事，这æ 
·å°±æ›´æœ‰æœºä¼šæˆåŠŸã€‚他也许成功了。但是我们还是假定å…
¬å¸å¤±è´¥äº†ã€‚如果他很有才干并能够管理å…
¬å¸ï¼Œæˆ‘相信他不会挨饿，因为有人会雇用他。</p>
+
+<p>所以这是一系列的不可能&mdash;&mdash;非常不可能的场景。不过我们还是ç
 ”究一下。</p>
+
+<p>因为他们在此想说的是专利体系会 &ldquo;保护protect&rdquo; 
我们的天才不会挨饿，因
为他可以为自己的技术申请一个专利。然后，当 IBM
+和他竟争时，他就说，&ldquo;IBM，你不能和我竟争，因
为我有专利，&rdquo;而 IBM 会说，&ldquo;不，不再是那æ 
·äº†!&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>下面就是接着发生的事。</p>
+
+<p>IBM
+说，&ldquo;不错，你
有一个专利。我们有这个专利，还有这个专利，还有那个专利，还有这个专利，等等，所有这些专利都在ä½
 çš„产品里出现了，如果你觉得你
还可以和我们竟争，我们会列出更多的专利。我们来签署交叉授权协议吧，大家都不会受伤。&rdquo;我们已经假定天才很懂经营，å›
 æ­¤ä»–会明白别无选择。他会签署交叉授权协议，当
+IBM 要求时，大家都会这么做。这意味着 IBM 有权 
&ldquo;使用&rdquo; 天才的专利，意味这 IBM
+将免费和他竟争，就象没有专利一æ 
·ï¼Œè¿™å°±æ˜¯è¯´æ‰€è°“专利带来的好处并不存在。天才没得到专利的好处。</p>
+
+<p>专利也许 &ldquo;保护了&rdquo; 我们和他的竟争，但不是 IBM
+的竟争&mdash;&mdash;不是每个超
级企业的竟争，这些竟争是对他的威胁。你们事å…
ˆå·²ç»çŸ¥é“，这个推理有问题。当超级企业的游说者
提议某些保护弱小竟争对手的策略时，如果这些策略真的有用，他们是不会支持的。但是以上推理还是阐明了为什么
+[软件专利] 不会保护弱小的竟争者。</p>
+
+<p>即使 IBM 不能一直这么干，还有许多被称为专利寄生虫的å…
¬å¸ï¼Œå®ƒä»¬çš„唯一作为就是使用专利压榨那些真正做事的人。</p>
+
+<p>专利律师告诉我们拥有专利是一件好事，但是在他们的领域却没有专利。并没有å
…³äºŽæ’°å†™å’Œå‘送律师函的专利，也没有å…
³äºŽæäº¤è¯‰è®¼çš„专利，更没有å…
³äºŽå¦‚何说服法官或陪审团的专利，因此
+IBM 也无法和专利寄生虫达成交叉授权。但是 IBM 
在思量，&ldquo;竟争对手也要付这个钱的;
+这是商业成本的一部分，我们可以接受。&rdquo;IBM
+等超级企业认为通过专利在它们的商业活动中占
有主导地位是好事，花钱搞定专利寄生虫也没什么。这就是为什么会有软件专利。</p>
+
+<p>有些软件开发者获得专利许可尤å…
¶å›°éš¾ï¼Œä»–们就是自由软件的开发者。其中的原因
是我们很难满足普通专利许可的条件，因
为普通专利许可要求按拷贝数目付费。但是自由软件å…
è®¸ç”¨æˆ·è‡ªç”±å¤åˆ¶å’Œåˆ†å‘，我们没有办法计算究竟有多少拷贝。</p>
+
+<p>如果一份拷贝的专利许可费是百万分之一美å…
ƒï¼Œé‚£ä¹ˆæˆ‘现在就可以全款支付。也许总数是 50 美å…
ƒï¼Œæˆ‘不确定，或者是 49
+美元，或者其他，因为我不知道人们复制了多少拷贝。</p>
+
+<p>专利持有者不必一定要按照拷贝数计费; 
他也可以一次性收费，但是这个费用就比较高了，一般是 
US$100,000。</p>
+
+<p>我们开发了如此多的自由软件，原因
是开发自由软件可以不花钱，但是我们不能在没有钱的情
况下支付一大笔钱。如果我们被迫花费专利费来为å…
¬ä¼—开发软件，我们做不了太多。</p>
+
+<p>这个就是获得专利许可的可能性。另一个可能性是让专利失效。如果一个国家认可软件专利、å
…è®¸è½¯ä»¶ä¸“利，那么一个专利是否达到æ 
‡å‡†å°±æ˜¯å”¯ä¸€çš„问题。如果你
的论据可能获胜，那么只有到法庭上才有用。</p>
+
+<p>论据有哪些呢?你的论据必
须是，在申请该专利的数年前，人们就已经知道同æ 
·çš„想法了。你需要找到一些现今的东西，说明人们在几
年前就å…
¬å¼€çŸ¥é“这个主意。所以证据在多年前就有了，如果它们对你
有利，如果你再能在现在证明这些，那么你
就有了让该专利失效的论据。这有可能行。</p>
+
+<p>打官司可能花费不菲，而其结果，那个可能无
效的专利对家底不厚的你可是很大的威胁。有很多人无
力负担保护自己的权利&mdash;&mdash;非常多的人。负担
得起的人是少数。</p>
+
+<p>这就是你要对禁止你
在程序里做事的每个专利可以采取的三个手段。实际
上，这些手断是不是可行依赖于å…
·ä½“的细节，有时一个都用不上;如果真是那样，你
的项目就是死路一条。</p>
+
+<p>但是大多数国家的律师告诉我们，&ldquo;不要预å…
ˆæŸ¥æ‰¾ä¸“利&rdquo;，原因是如果你
已经知道了某专利，那么该专利侵权的惩罚会更重。因
此他们会告诉你
+&ldquo;闭上眼睛。不要查找专利，直接去实现你
的设计，然后期待吧。&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>当然，不是每个设计都会碰到专利限制。你
有可能没有碰到专利问题。但是你要在雷区行进很多步，安å…
¨é€šè¿‡æ˜¯å¾ˆéš¾çš„。当然，专利持有者并不是同时现身，所以你
也不知道会来多少讨债者。</p>
+
+<p>上面讲到的自然顺序计算专利的持有者曾要求 5% 
的销售额作为回报。你
也许会考虑支付这个专利许可费，但是后面又来了 19 
个专利持有者，每个都要求 5
+%，你会把整个销售额都分掉吗?然后又来了第 21 
个专利持有者，你又怎么办?</p>
+
+<p>商业人士看到这个场景会说太搞笑了，因为你的å…
¬å¸æ—©åœ¨ä½“验这个场景之前就结束了。他们告诉我两三个这æ 
·çš„专利就把一个公司搞倒了。所以你看不到
+20。他们会一个接一个地出现，你永远也无
法知道究竟有多少。</p>
+
+<p>软件专利是一团糟。它们对软件开发者
是一团糟，但是另外它们也限制着每个计算机用户，因
为软件专利限制了用户对自己计算机的使用。</p>
+
+<p>这个和普通专利有所不同，比如汽车的引擎。引擎的专利只限制é€
 è½¦çš„企业;它们不会限制你我这æ 
·çš„用户。但是软件专利却会限制你
我，也限制所有使用机算机的人。因此我们不能仅
从经济的角度来对待
它们;我们不能只用经济的观点来做判断。它们还有更重要的危险。</p>
+
+<p>即使从经济的观点看，专利系统也是自相矛盾，因
为它原定的目的是促进发展。通过构建人工的激励让人们å…
¬å¼€æƒ³æ³•ï¼Œä»¥ä¸ºå®ƒä¼šå¸®åŠ©äº§ä¸šè¿›æ­¥ã€‚但是它的结果却是南辕北辙，å›
 ä¸ºé‡è¦çš„软件工作不是å…
¬å¼€æƒ³æ³•ï¼Œè€Œæ˜¯åœ¨ä¸€ä¸ªç¨‹åºé‡Œå®žçŽ°æˆåƒä¸Šä¸‡çš„想法。而软件专利阻止大家这么做，å›
 æ­¤å®ƒä»¬åœ¨ç»æµŽä¸Šæ˜¯è‡ªç›¸çŸ›ç›¾ã€‚</p>
+
+<p>已经有经济ç 
”究表明了这一点&mdash;&mdash;在一个大量创新累积的领域，专利系统实é™
…导致 R &amp; D
+投入的减少。当然，它还在å…
¶ä»–方面阻止进步。所以，即使我们不考虑软件专利的不å…
¬æ­£æ€§ï¼Œåªä»Žç‹­éš˜çš„经济学观点看，专利系统还是有害的。</p>
+
+<p>有人可能会反驳说 &ldquo;人们在å…
¶ä»–领域已经采用专利制度几十年了，已经习
惯了，为什么还要再来个例外?&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>这个问题带有一个可笑的假设。就象说，&ldquo;å…
¶ä»–人罹患了癌症，为什么你不得呢?&rdquo;
+我觉得有人没得癌症是好事，不管是不是有别人得癌症。这个问题的可笑之处在于å
…¶å‰ææ˜¯æˆ‘们大家都要忍受专利带来的伤害。</p>
+
+<p>但是这里暗藏着一个敏感的问题，就是 
&ldquo;各个领域的专利政策对该领域的好影响和坏影响有何不同?&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>就一个产品会有多少专利覆盖，不同的领域有重要的不同。</p>
+
+<p>大家现在有了一个幼稚的看法，我们需要摆脱这个看法，å›
 
为它是错的。这个看法就是一个产品会有一个专利，而这个专利覆盖整个产品设计。这æ
 ·å¦‚果你设计了一个新产品，那么它还没有专利，而你
就有获得这个产品
+&ldquo;专利&rdquo; 的机会。</p>
+
+<p>事情并非如此。在 1800 年代，事情可能是那æ 
·ï¼Œä½†æ˜¯çŽ°åœ¨ä¸å†æ˜¯äº†ã€‚事实上，每个产品会 [有] 
多少专利是一个分布。分布的起点是
+1，但是每个领域的产品都不是 1 了; 
大家分布在不同的位置。</p>
+
+<p>最接近 1
+的分布是制药业。几十年前，一种药真的就是一个专利，因
为这个专利就是整个药物的化学成分。那时，如果你
开发了一个新药，你
可以确信没有人为此药申请专利，而且你
可以为此药申请一个专利。</p>
+
+<p>不过，现在情况变了。现在专利变得更宽泛了，因此你
可以开发一种新药，但是你却不能生产该药，因
为已经有人用更宽泛的专利覆盖到该药了。</p>
+
+<p>而且有可能会有几
个类似的专利同时覆盖到该药，不过不会有几百个。原因
是我们的生物工程能力还比较局限，还没人知道如何把众多想法组合在一起为制药做贡献。如果ä½
 å¯ä»¥ç»„合几种想法，那们你已经做得很好了。但是在å…
¶ä»–领域你要组合更多的想法来生产一个产品。</p>
+
+<p>软件位于分布的另一端，我们可以在一个设计中组合比å…
¶ä»–行业更多的想法，因为软件领域基本上比所有å…
¶ä»–领域都简单。我假设软件行业人才的智力和物理工程人才的一æ
 ·ã€‚并不是我们原则上比他们更好;
+而是软件领域原则上更容易，因为我们做得是数学工作。</p>
+
+<p>程序由数学组件构成，它们都有定义，而物理对象却没有定义。物质就是物质，å›
 æ­¤ç”±äºŽç‰©è´¨çš„顽固天性，你的设计可能不会按照 
&ldquo;预想&rdquo;
+行事。这就很麻烦。你
不能说物质有缺陷，而是物理世界应该设法解决此问题。[不过]
 我们 [程序员] 基于数学构建大厦，而它屹立不到因
为没什么份量。</p>
+
+<p>物理工程需要对付很多复杂性，而我们却不用担
心这些。</p>
+
+<p>例如，当我在 <code>while</code>-循环中放入 
<code>if</code>-语句时，
+</p>
+
+<ul>
+<li>我无须担心 <code>while</code>-循环率会变化，而 
<code>if</code>-语句因此开始震荡而可能会崩溃;</li>
+
+<li>我不用担
心循环是否震动的太快&mdash;&mdash;每秒钟数百万次&mdash;&mdash;而可能产生会导致程序错误数据的高频射频信号;</li>
+
+<li>我也无须担心来自环境的腐蚀性液体可能会渗透到 
<code>if</code>-语句和
+<code>while</code>-语句之间，并开始腐蚀语句直到信号无
法发送;</li>
+
+<li>我无须担心 <code>if</code>-语句产生的热量会从 
<code>while</code>-语句冒出并烧掉
+<code>if</code>-语句; 而且</li>
+
+<li>我不用担心如何取出被损坏、被烧坏或被腐蚀的 
<code>if</code>-语句，并用另一个
+<code>if</code>-语句替换掉，让程序重新运行。</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>如此，我无须担心每次复制程序时如何在 
<code>while</code>-语句中插入
+<code>if</code>-语句。我也不必为复制程序设计一个工厂，因
为有很多通用的命令来复制程序。</p>
+
+<p>如果我要复制 CD，那么我只须制作一个母盘; 
而已经有了可以制作母盘程序，我可以写å…
¥ä»»ä½•æ•°æ®ã€‚我可以制作一个母盘、写å…
¥æ•°æ®å¹¶å‘给某个工厂，它就会为我复制
+CD。我自己不必为每次设计开发不同的工厂。</p>
+
+<p>而物理工程经常要做这些事;
+他们不得不设计便于生产的产品。设计工厂可比设计产品更艰巨，然后ä½
 è¿˜è¦æŠ•å…¥æ•°ç™¾ä¸‡èµ„金来建造工厂。有了这些难题，你
不太可能在一个产品中融入大量不同的想法并做出来。</p>
+
+<p>包含百万量级不同设计元素的物理设计会是一个超
极庞大的项目。而包
含百万量级不同设计的程序却不是不是问题。那只是几
十万行代码，一队人在几年之内
就可以写好，所以不是大事。因此，专利系统加
在我们身上的重压比å…
¶ä»–领域大了许多，他们受到物质的干扰更多。</p>
+
+<p>有个律师研究了一个大型程序，就是 Linux 内æ 
¸ï¼Œå®ƒè¢«æˆ‘开创的 GNU 操作系统所用。这是五年前; 他发现了 
283
+个不同的美国专利，每个专利看来都会禁止 Linux 代ç 
æ‰§è¡ŒæŸç§è®¡ç®—。那时，我曾看到一篇文章说 Linux 只占
整个系统的 0.25%。因此， 我们用
+300 乘 400 来估算整个系统受到的专利限制可达 100,000
+以上。这只是一个粗略的估计，也没有更准确的信息了，因
为真要准确估算的话会是一个巨大的工作。</p>
+
+<p>这名律师并没有公布专利的名单，因为那样会使 Linux 内æ 
¸çš„开发者
受到危险，让他们处于可能会在控诉后受到更大处罚的境地。他æ—
 æ„ä¼¤å®³è¿™äº›å¼€å‘者;
+他想要的是展示问题的严重性，关于专利的僵局。</p>
+
+<p>程序员马上就可以理解此事，但是政治家通常不懂编程;
+他们一般把专利想象成和版权基本类似的东西，只是更强一些。他们这æ
 ·æƒ³æ˜¯å› ä¸ºè½¯ä»¶å¼€å‘者没有受到软件版权的危险，因
此也就不会受到软件专利的危险。他们这样想是因
为软件作者拥有软件的版权，[因此同样的]
+软件作者
也会拥有软件专利。这是错误的&mdash;&mdash;我们应该怎æ 
·è®©ä»–们了解专利的真正目的呢? 它们在美国这æ 
·çš„国家的目的?</p>
+
+<p>我发现比较软件和交响乐会很有用。下面讲一下为什么这是一个好的类比。</p>
+
+<p>软件和交响乐都组合了许多想法。交响乐组合了多种音乐想法。但是ä½
 æ— æ³•ç®€å•æŒ‘几个想法并说
+&ldquo;这是我的想法组合，你喜欢吗?&rdquo;因
为要让它们工作，你必须要实现它们。你无法简单挑几
个音乐想法，排列它们并说，&ldquo;你
喜欢这个组合吗?&rdquo;但是你听不到
+[那个排列]。你必须撰写实现所有想法的乐符。</p>
+
+<p>困难的工作，大多数人并不善长，在于撰写这写乐符做成美妙的乐ç«
 
。是的，很多人能够在列表里挑出音乐想法，但是我们不懂实现这些想法的方法，也æ—
 æ³•å†™å‡ºåŠ¨å¬çš„交响乐。只有某些人有这æ 
·çš„才能。这限制了你。我可能能发明几
个音乐点子，但是我不懂如何有效地使用他们。</p>
+
+<p>想象在 1700 
年代，欧洲政府决定促进交响乐的发展，由此建立了一个音乐想法专利的体系，这æ
 ·å°±å¯ä»¥æŠŠç”¨è¯­è¨€æè¿°çš„音乐思想专利保护。</p>
+
+<p>例如，把一个特定的乐符系列做为模式可以是专利，和弦可以是专利，韵律模式可以是专利，单独使用某种乐器可以是专利，而重复性动作的æ
 
¼å¼ä¹Ÿå¯ä»¥æ˜¯ä¸“利。任何可以用文字描述的音乐思想都可以是专利。</p>
+
+<p>想象在 1800
+年代，你是贝多芬，你要写一个交响乐。你
会发现编写交响乐变得非常困难，你
不是会被控告就是不能写好听的音乐，因为你
不得不绕开所有已知的专利。如果你有报怨，专利持有者
会说，&ldquo;贝多芬，你是在嫉妒别人先有了这些想法吧。你
为什么不会去想一想自己的点子呢?&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>贝多芬有了自己的想法。他被认为是一个伟大的作曲家正是å›
 ä¸ºä»–的这些新想法、他实际
使用的这些想法。他明白如何合理运用这些想法，就是把它们和已知的众多想法组合起来。他也可能把一些新思想和大量老的和不矛盾思想组合起来。结果就是一个有争议的篇ç«
 ï¼Œä½†æ˜¯ä¹Ÿä¸æ˜¯å¤§å®¶éƒ½èƒ½é€‚应的音乐。</p>
+
+<p>对我们来说，贝多芬的音乐听来并不好坏参半。不过我被告知，在那音乐刚出来的时期，它是有争议的。不过，å›
 
为他把新的思想和许多已知的思想组合在一起，他就让人们能够有机会拓展一下。他们确实也拓展了，这就是为什么这些思想对我们来说没什么问题。但是，没人，即使贝多芬也不能从零开始创新音乐，一点也不借鉴已有的思想，并做出一些人们爱听的音乐。也没人能够从零开始重新发明计算机，而不使用任何现有的思想，做出让人们想用的计算机。</p>
+
+<p>当技术快速变化，你的情形就是 20 年前做的东西已经完å…
¨ä¸å¤Ÿäº†ã€‚20
+年前并没有万维网。的确，人们那时也用电脑做了很多事，但是人们现在做的是å
…³äºŽä¸‡ç»´ç½‘的东西。你不能只用 20
+年前的思想来做这事。我预计技术还会不断改变，人们会有新的机会获取穿透整个领域的专利。</p>
+
+<p>大企业自己就能做到这一点。例如，几
年前微软决定制定一个伪开放文档标准，并打通国际æ 
‡å‡†ç»„织的关系获得通过。但是他们制定的æ 
‡å‡†æ˜¯å¾®è½¯å·²èŽ·ä¸“利的东西。微软足够大，他们可以从自己的专利开始设计一套æ
 ¼å¼æˆ–协议（不管有没有实用价值），这种东西你无法å…
¼å®¹ï¼Œé™¤éžä¹Ÿä½¿ç”¨å…¶ä¸“利思想。因此，微软就可以让此æ 
¼å¼æˆ–协议成为事实上的标准，无论是否要走æ 
‡å‡†ç»„织的后门。只需凭自身的体量来硬推，人们就不得不使用å
…¶æ ¼å¼ï¼Œè¿™åŸºæœ¬ä¸Šå°±æ„å‘³ç€ä»–们掌握了å…
¨ä¸–界的命脉。我们有必要告诉当权者此种情
形。我们应当告诉他们为什么这很糟糕。</p>
+
+<p>我听说新西兰考虑软件专利的原因是一个大å…
¬å¸è¦åž„断权。限制所有的人而让一个å…
¬å¸èŽ·å¾—更多的利益，这绝对是当政者不该做的事。</p>
+
+<p>好了，现在可以提问了。</p></dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>有其他的选择吗?</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>软件没有专利。我知道这æ 
·å¯ä»¥ã€‚当我从事软件行业时并没有软件专利。人们开发软件，人们用多种方法分发这些软件，他们æ—
 éœ€æ‹…心会被专利持有者控告，因此他们很安å…
¨ã€‚软件专利不解决实际
问题，所以我们不用问还有没有别的选择。</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>开发者如何获得回报呢?</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd><p>很多方法。软件专利和这个无关。如果你
是一个软件开发者，请记住软件专利不能帮你获得你
所需要的东西。</p>
+
+<p>不同的软件开发者需求不同。我在 1980
+年代开发了一些重要的软件，我想要的回报是看到人们有自由使用电脑。我获得了回报，虽然还不完å
…
¨ï¼Œå¹¶ä¸æ˜¯æ‰€æœ‰äººéƒ½æœ‰äº†è¿™ä¸ªè‡ªç”±ã€‚但是软件专利却只是在阻止我做这件事。</p>
+
+<p>有人开发软件是为了挣钱。软件专利对他们也是威胁，现在还是，å›
 ä¸ºä¸“利持有者会向他们要钱，或者要让他们å…
³é—¨ï¼Œä»–们还怎么挣钱?</p></dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>如何防止抄袭&hellip;&hellip;</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd><p>抄袭和我们讨论的问题没有关系。一点å…
³ç³»éƒ½æ²¡æœ‰ã€‚</p>
+
+<p>抄袭是说复制了一个作品的文字并声称是自己写的。但是专利并不å
…³å¿ƒæŸä¸ªä½œå“çš„文字。专利和这事无关。</p>
+
+<p>如果你写了一部作品，其中包
含了一些思想，当然总是这样的，人们没有理由认为包
含这些思想的专利就是你的。它们更可能是其他许多人的，å…
¶ä¸­ä¸€åŠå±žäºŽè¶…级企业，他们会告你的。因此你都不用担心
+[抄袭]; 远在有人要复制之前，你就会被盘剥了。</p>
+
+<p>我觉得你是把专利和版权搞混了。它们没什么å…
±åŒç‚¹ã€‚我已经解释了专利会如何对付软件，但是我认为你
不信，因为你听到版权可以如何如和，而你
把它们俩混在一起了，你
觉得版权可做的事专利也可以做&mdash;&mdash;但是它们不能。如果ä½
 å†™äº†ä»£ç ï¼Œä»£ç çš„版权可能是你的;
+但是如果代ç 
å®žçŽ°äº†æŸäº›æƒ³æ³•ï¼Œè€Œè¿™äº›æƒ³æ³•æœ‰ä¸“利，那么这些专利属于可能控告ä½
 çš„人。</p>
+
+<p>你不必害怕，有了版权，当你自己写的代ç 
ï¼Œè€Œæœ‰äººå·²ç»æœ‰è¯¥ä»£ç çš„版权，他们可以告你，因
为版权只限制复制。事实上，即使你写了和其他人完全一æ 
·çš„东西，如果你可以证明你
没有复制他的东西，那么这就是对你的辩护，因
为版权只管复制的事。版权法只关心作品的作者归属详情
+[比如，不是作品包含的思想]，因
此版权法和专利法在针对的事情上毫不相干，其效果也完å…
¨ä¸åŒã€‚</p>
+
+<p>我也不完å…
¨èµžåŒäººä»¬å¯¹ç‰ˆæƒæ³•åšçš„所有的事，我也曾批评过版权法。但它是完å
…¨ä¸åŒçš„、不相关的问题。如果你
认为专利法帮助了开发软件的人，那么意味着你
对专利法的实际作为有一个完全错误的概念。</p></dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>不要错怪我。我和你站在一边。</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>好的，不过你的概念还是错的。我并不责怪你，因为你
一直都被蒙在鼓里。</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>如果我写的是商业软件，那么把它作为黑盒和密秘对我会有很好的保护吗?</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>我不想讨论这个问题，因
为我并不赞成此事，我认为它是不道德的，但这个是不相å…
³çš„问题。</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>我明白这个。</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>我不想改变话题，然后鼓励我觉得是不好的东西。但是因
为要改变话题，我还是不要讨论此事吧。</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>我们的研究、科学和技术基金会，我觉得可能和你
们的国家科学基金会类似，都为ç 
”发提供资金。他们非常极积地建议的一个事情
就是他们资助的想法最好得到专利保护。</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>这种做法不应该用于软件，因
为软件想法任何时候都不应该有专利。但是你
看到的、更一般的情况是奉行商业至上的社会è…
è´¥çš„一个例子。我并不是一个共产主义者
，我也不想摈弃商业，但是如果商业超
越一切，生活的方方面面都以商业为导向，那是很危险的。</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>Richard，谈到基金会，可能你需要为象新西兰这æ 
·çš„小国推荐通过软件挣钱的更好的方法。</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>软件专利不能帮任何人从软件上挣钱。它们是要在你
想挣钱时受到控告的威胁。</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>这就让新西兰这æ 
·çš„国家想要构建以软件为部分基础的经济体变得困难。</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>对不起，我不知道你说的 &ldquo;这&rdquo;
+指什么。软件专利让大家都面临困难。如果新西兰å…
è®¸è½¯ä»¶ä¸“利，那么人们在新西兰就很难开发和分发程序，因
为会受到被起诉的威胁。软件专利和开发与使用一个程序没有å
…³ç³»ã€‚</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>因此对新西å…
°æ¥è¯´ï¼Œä¸ºäº†å‘展经济起见，没有软件专利会更好。</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd><p>对。每个国家都有自己的专利系统，它们各自独立运作，除了有些国家签署了类似
+&ldquo;如果你在此国获得一个专利，你
基本上可以把它带到我国，我们会根据你
原来的申请日期来评判。&rdquo;
+除了这个，每个国家都有自己的专利判断æ 
‡å‡†å¹¶æœ‰è‡ªå·±çš„一整套专利。</p>
+
+<p>结果就是，如果美国允许软件专利，而新西兰不å…
è®¸ï¼Œé‚£ä¹ˆä¸–界上所有人，包括新西å…
°äººï¼Œéƒ½å¯ä»¥èŽ·å¾—美国软件专利并能在美国起诉可怜的美国人．而如果新西å
…°ä¸å…è®¸è½¯ä»¶ä¸“利就意味着我们都不能获取新西å…
°è½¯ä»¶ä¸“利，也不能在新西兰起诉新西å…
°äººã€‚可以确信的是，几
乎所有的软件专利都属于外国人，一有机会，他们就会使用这些专利对付新西å
…°è½¯ä»¶å¼€å‘者，基本上让他们无法立足。</p></dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>从前有个 Hughes 航空器的案子，我想是在 1990 年代。</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>我并不知道这个案子。</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>原则上新西兰有软件专利。我们并不是要进å…
¥ä¸€ä¸ªæ²¡æœ‰ä¸“利的领域，我们是有的。</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd><p>我不知道，但是有人告诉我现在大家正在决定是否要在法律层面å
…è®¸è½¯ä»¶ä¸“利。而超级企业通过 WIPO 
的游说经常受到专利局的呼应。</p>
+
+<p>WIPO，顾名思义，就是世界知识产权组织（World Intellectual 
Property
+Organization），不会干好事，因
为使用该词的目的都是为了混水摸鱼。WIPO
+从超
级企业获得大量资金，而他们使用这些资金让专利局的官员到闲静的度假胜地去培训。培训的å†
…容就是扭曲法律让它们能够在不应采用专利的领域å…
è®¸ä¸“利。</p>
+
+<p>在许多国家，都有法律和判决宣称软件等不能有专利，算法也不能申请专利，&ldquo;数学&rdquo;
+算法也不能作为专利（天知道一个算法是不是数学算法），还有许多æ
 ‡å‡†å¦‚果自然解释就意味着软件无
法有专利，但是专利局却扭曲法律千方百计地å…
è®¸è½¯ä»¶ä¸“利。</p>
+
+<p>例如，许多实际
上就是软件专利的东西被描述为带有中央处理器、内存、输å…
¥è¾“出外设、指令提取设备加
上执行计算手段的形式。这就是明确地描述普通计算机的所有部件，然后再说，&ldquo;这是我们要申请专利的物理系统&rdquo;，但是å
…¶çœŸæ­£è¦ç”³è¯·çš„专利是计算机的软件。人们会使用很多这æ 
·çš„伎倆。</p>
+
+<p>专利局一般会扭曲法律来å…
è®¸æ›´å¤šçš„专利。美国的软件专利是在 1982
+年被法庭判决创建的。现在看来当时的判决法庭最后改了主意，结果就是案子被以误ä¼
 è¯¯åœ°ä¼ äº†ä¸‹æ¥;
+看来这个结论会推翻所有的软件专利，除非最高法院推翻该判决。最高法院正在考虑这件事，在不到一年的时间里我们就会知道谁胜谁败。</p></dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>如果该案落败，在美国会有什么法律活动吗?</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>有的，我已经花了 19 
年的时间在推动此事了。这是一个在多个国家一再进行的斗争。</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>你如何看待 I4i 的案子?</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>我完全不知道你说的事。</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>它是关于微软基本上会停止销售 Word 的案子，因
为他们侵犯了一个加拿大专利。</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>是那个案子啊。那是软件专利有多危险的一个例子，对所有软件开发è€
…。我不喜欢微软的所做所为，但那是和我们的目的无å…
³çš„问题。人们起诉软件开发者并说
+&ldquo;我不让你分发这个软件&rdquo; 对谁都没好处。</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>显然我们生活在一个并不完美的世界，有时我们会遇到软件专利的麻烦。ä½
 æ˜¯å¦è®¤ä¸ºç ”究人员应该有象版权豁免一样的专利豁å…
ç‰¹æƒ?</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>不，寻找局部方案是错误的，因
为我们有很大的机会构建一个完备的方案。除了超级企业，å…
¶ä»–开发、分发和使用软件的人看清
楚软件专利的危害后，他们都会完å…
¨æ‹’绝软件专利。即使有个别例外，支持软件专利的人也只是这些例外里的人。这些局部方案基本上只是干扰。人们会说，&ldquo;我知道我们不能真正解决问题，我不追求那个。让我建议一个局部方案。&rdquo;
+但是局部方案并不能让开发软件变安全。</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>不过，你不会反对一个针对软件专利的局部方案，所以你
不会反对试验一下，它可能对制药业是一个好方案。</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>我不会反对这个。</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>不过，你是说你
不觉得它可以用于软件，只是确认一下。</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>只顾及部分人、只覆盖某些活动、只摆脱半数软件专利的东西就象是说，&ldquo;我们可能会排除一部分雷区，或è€
…可能破坏掉半数地雷。&rdquo;
+[这很重要] 但是并不能保证安全。</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>你一直在世界各地讲述此事。多少人采纳了呢? 
有没有政府改了政策，或者不再接纳软件专利?</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>有一些。几年前，印度想修改专利法明确å…
è®¸è½¯ä»¶ä¸“利，后来放弃了。美国几
年前也提出一个交易条约，那是一个针对拉美的自由压榨条约。它被巴西总统阻止了，他对软件专利和另一件å
…
³äºŽç”µè„‘的糟糕做法说了不，这就废了该条约。这些明显是美国要强åŠ
 åˆ°æ•´ä¸ªç¾Žå·žçš„。但是这些东西并没有完全死掉;
+有些公司雇有全职人员寻找搅乱其他国家的方法。</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>在原则上没有软件专利的国家，有没有什么å…
³äºŽæ­¤äº‹å¯¹åˆ›æ–°ç¤¾å›¢ç»æµŽå½±å“çš„实际数据?</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd><p>没有，测量这些数据几乎不可能。实际
上，我不能说没有。有一点。测量专利的影响非常困难，因
为你
要比较真实世界和虚拟世界，所以没有办法确定究竟会发生什么事。</p>
+
+<p>我能说的是在有软件专利之前，已经有很多软件开发的活动;
 不过没有现在这么多，因
为那时的计算机用户的数量也没法和现在相比。</p>
+
+<p>即使美国，在 1982 年又有多少计算机用户呢?
+那只是一小部分而已。但是还是有软件开发者
的。他们并没有说，&ldquo;我们极度需要专利&rdquo;。他们开发程序也不会å›
 ä¸ºä¸“利侵权而被告。但是我看到当时有些
+[经济] 研究，它们说显然软件专利没有导致研究的增加
，但是 [却] 把部分资金分散到专利方面。</p></dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>你觉得交易密秘会有意义吗?</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>不。在软件专利之前，许多软件开发者保持着å…
¶ç¨‹åºçš„秘密。但是他们通常不会对一般性的想法保密，因
为他们意识到软件开发中的主要工作不是要拿别人的常规想法，那是要实现大量的想法。å›
 æ­¤ä»–们会，[或者]
+他们会让雇主在学术期刊上发表他们的思想。现在，这些思想会申请专利。这个和开发出有用的程序没有å
…
³ç³»ï¼Œåªæ˜¯è®©äººä»¬åœ¨æ²¡æœ‰ç¨‹åºæ—¶äº†è§£è¿™äº›æƒ³æ³•ã€‚此外，大多数想法，程序中组合的成千上万的想法本来就是已知的。</dd>
+
+<dt>问：</dt>
+<dd>作为支持案例，我听过一个访谈，受访者是 PayPal 
创始人之一，他说他强烈地感到他的成功是 5% 的想法和 95% 
的执行，这个非常支持你的观点。</dd>
+
+<dt>答：</dt>
+<dd>我同意。</dd>
+
+<dt>SF:</dt>
+<dd>非常好。Richard 有一些免费 [free] 的贴纸。</dd>
+
+<dt>RMS:</dt>
+<dd>是免费 [Gratis]。那些 [另外的东西] 是用来卖的。</dd>
+
+<dt>SF:</dt>
+<dd>现在你可以下来了。这是一个精彩的讨论&mdash;感谢你
，Richard。</dd>
+
+</dl>
+
+<hr class="no-display" />
+<div class="edu-note c"><p id="fsfs">此演讲发表于 <a
+href="https://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/";><cite>自由软件，自由社会：Richard
+M. Stallman 选集</cite></a>。</p></div>
+</div>
+
+<div class="translators-notes">
+
+<!--TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't have notes.-->
+ </div>
+</div>
+
+<!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.zh-cn.html" -->
+<div id="footer" role="contentinfo">
+<div class="unprintable">
+
+<p>请将有关自由软件基金会(FSF) &amp; 
GNU的一般性问题发送到<a
+href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org";>&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>。也可以通过<a
+href="/contact/">其他联系方法</a>联系自由软件基金会(FSF)。有å…
³å¤±æ•ˆé“¾æŽ¥æˆ–其他错误和建议，请发送邮件到<a
+href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org";>&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>。</p>
+
+<p>
+<!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
+        replace it with the translation of these two:
+
+        We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
+        translations.  However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
+        Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
+        to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org";>
+
+        &lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
+
+        <p>For information on coordinating and contributing translations of
+        our web pages, see <a
+        href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+        README</a>. -->
+我们尽最大努力来提供精准和高质量的翻译，但难å…
ä¼šå­˜åœ¨é”™è¯¯å’Œä¸è¶³ã€‚如果您在这方面有评论或一般性的建议，请发送至
 <a
+href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org";>&lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>。</p><p>å
…³äºŽè¿›è¡Œåè°ƒä¸Žæäº¤ç¿»è¯‘的更多信息参见
+<a href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">《译者
指南》</a>。</p>
+</div>
+
+<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
+     files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
+     be under CC BY-ND 4.0.  Please do NOT change or remove this
+     without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+     Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+     document.  For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+     document was modified, or published.
+     
+     If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+     Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+     years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+     year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+     being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+     
+     There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+     Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+<p>Copyright &copy; 2009, 2021 Richard Stallman</p>
+
+<p>本页面使用 <a rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/";>Creative Commons
+Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a> 授权。</p>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.zh-cn.html" -->
+<div class="translators-credits">
+
+<!--TRANSLATORS: Use space (SPC) as msgstr if you don't want credits.-->
+<b>翻译团队</b>：<a rel="team"
+href="https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/www-zh-cn/";>&lt;CTT&gt;</a>，2021。</div>
+
+<p class="unprintable"><!-- timestamp start -->
+最后更新：
+
+$Date: 2021/10/29 10:34:12 $
+
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+<!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include -->
+</body>
+</html>

Index: philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn-en.html
===================================================================
RCS file: philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn-en.html
diff -N philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn-en.html
--- /dev/null   1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.zh-cn-en.html      29 Oct 2021 
10:34:13 -0000      1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,1486 @@
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<!-- Parent-Version: 1.96 -->
+<!-- This page is derived from /server/standards/boilerplate.html -->
+<!--#set var="TAGS" value="speeches" -->
+<!--#set var="DISABLE_TOP_ADDENDUM" value="yes" -->
+<title>The Danger of Software Patents
+- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/danger-of-software-patents.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/ph-breadcrumb.html" -->
+<!--GNUN: OUT-OF-DATE NOTICE-->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/top-addendum.html" -->
+<div class="article reduced-width">
+<h2>The Danger of Software Patents</h2>
+
+<address class="byline">by <a href="https://www.stallman.org/";>Richard
+Stallman</a></address>
+
+<div class="infobox">
+<p>This is the transcript of a talk presented on 8 October 2009 at
+Victoria University of Wellington.</p>
+</div>
+<hr class="thin" />
+
+<dl>
+<dt>SF:</dt>
+<dd><p>My name is Susy Frankel and on behalf of myself and Meredith
+Kolsky Lewis, I'd like to welcome you to this seminar hosted by the
+New Zealand Centre for International Economic Law.  Brenda Chawner,
+who is part of the Victoria University School of Information
+Management, rather than the Centre I just named being part of the Law
+Faculty, is really responsible for bringing Richard Stallman back to
+New Zealand and hosting his tour of New Zealand, including this stop
+here in Wellington tonight.  She's unfortunately unable to be with us
+at this moment because she's doing what we do in universities which is
+teach.</p>
+
+<p>So it's my pleasure to welcome you to the lecture &ldquo;The Danger
+of Software Patents.&rdquo;  Richard Stallman has a suite of lectures
+that he offers, and after discussion with Brenda, I chose this topic
+precisely because for the first real time in New Zealand history, we
+have a somewhat prolonged, but important, debate about patent law
+reform, and many of you in the room are responsible for the debate
+relating to software patents.  So it seemed very topical, very timely.
+So thank you, Richard, for making that offer.</p>
+
+<p>Richard Stallman needs little introduction.  Nonetheless, for some
+of you who have not heard of him previously, he has launched the
+development of the GNU operating system.  I had never heard GNU said
+before, and I went online to YouTube (where would we be be without
+YouTube)&hellip;</p></dd>
+
+<dt>RMS:</dt>
+<dd>Oh, you shouldn't recommend YouTube, because they distribute in a
+patented video format.</dd>
+
+<dt>SF:</dt>
+<dd>Good point.  I only recommend it for the point that I thought do
+you say G&nbsp;N&nbsp;U or GNU?</dd>
+
+<dt>RMS:</dt>
+<dd>Wikipedia says that.  [The answer is, pronounce it as a one
+syllable, with a hard G.]</dd>
+
+<dt>SF:</dt>
+<dd>Yes, but live I heard you say it on YouTube.  But nonetheless, the
+important point is that it's not proprietorial.  But the most
+interesting point is that Richard has received many honors for his
+work.  My favorite, and therefore the one that I'm going to mention,
+is the Takeda Award for Social and Economic Betterment, and I imagine
+we're going to hear a lot of that tonight, so join me in welcoming
+Richard.</dd>
+
+<dt>RMS:</dt>
+<dd><p>First of all, I'd like to mention one of the reasons why I'm
+drinking this [a can or bottle of a cola which is not coke] is there's
+a worldwide boycott of Coca-Cola Company for murdering union
+organizers in Colombia.  Look at the
+site <a href="http://killercoke.org";>killercoke.org</a>.  And they're
+not talking about the effects of drinking the product&mdash;after all,
+the same might be true of many other products&mdash;it's murder.  So
+before you buy any drink product, look at the fine print and see if
+it's made by Coca-Cola Company.</p>
+
+<p>I'm most known for starting the free software movement and leading
+development of the GNU operating system&mdash;although most of the
+people who use the system mistakenly believe it's Linux and think it
+was started by somebody else a decade later.  But I'm not going to be
+speaking about any of that today.  I'm here to talk about a legal
+danger to all software developers, distributors, and users: the danger
+of patents&mdash;on computational ideas, computational techniques, an
+idea for something you can do on a computer.</p>
+
+<p>Now, to understand this issue, the first thing you need to realize
+is that patent law has nothing to do with copyright law&mdash;they're
+totally different.  Whatever you learn about one of them, you can be
+sure it doesn't apply to the other.</p>
+
+<p>So, for example, any time a person makes a statement about
+&ldquo;intellectual property,&rdquo; that's spreading confusion,
+because it's lumping together not only these two laws but also at
+least a dozen others.  They're all different, and the result is any
+statement which purports to be about &ldquo;intellectual
+property&rdquo; is pure confusion&mdash;either the person making the
+statement is confused, or the person is trying to confuse others.  But
+either way, whether it's accidental or malicious, it's confusion.</p>
+
+<p>Protect yourself from this confusion by rejecting any statement
+which makes use of that term.  The only way to make thoughtful
+comments and think clear thoughts about any one of these laws is to
+distinguish it first from all the others, and talk or think about one
+particular law, so that we can understand what it actually does and
+then form conclusions about it.  So I'll be talking about patent law,
+and what happens in those countries which have allowed patent law to
+restrict software.</p>
+
+<p>So, what does a patent do?  A patent is an explicit,
+government-issued monopoly on using a certain idea.  In the patent
+there's a part called the claims, which describe exactly what you're
+not allowed to do (although they're written in a way you probably
+can't understand).  It's a struggle to figure out what those
+prohibitions actually mean, and they may go on for many pages of fine
+print.</p>
+
+<p>So the patent typically lasts for 20 years, which is a fairly long
+time in our field.  Twenty years ago there was no World Wide
+Web&mdash;a tremendous amount of the use of computers goes on in an
+area which wasn't even possible to propose 20 years ago.  So of course
+everything that people do on it is something that's new since 20 years
+ago&mdash;at least in some aspect it is new.  So if patents had been
+applied for we'd be prohibited from doing all of it, and we may be
+prohibited from doing all of it in countries that have been foolish
+enough to have such a policy.</p>
+
+<p>Most of the time, when people describe the function of the patent
+system, they have a vested interest in the system.  They may be patent
+lawyers, or they may work in the Patent Office, or they may be in the
+patent office of a megacorporation, so they want you to like the
+system.</p>
+
+<p>The <cite>Economist</cite> once referred to the patent system as
+&ldquo;a time-consuming lottery.&rdquo; If you've ever seen publicity
+for a lottery, you understand how it works: they dwell on the very
+unlikely probability of winning, and they don't talk about the
+overwhelming likelihood of losing.  In this way, they intentionally
+and systematically present a biased picture of what's likely to happen
+to you, without actually lying about any particular fact.</p>
+
+<p>It's the same way for the publicity for the patent system: they
+talk about what it's like to walk down the street with a patent in
+your pocket&mdash;or first of all, what it's like to get a patent,
+then what it's like to have a patent in your pocket, and every so
+often you can pull it out and point it at somebody and say,
+&ldquo;Give me your money.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>To compensate for their bias, I'm going to describe it from the
+other side, the victim side&mdash;what it's like for people who want
+to develop or distribute or run software.  You have to worry that any
+day someone might walk up to you and point a patent at you and say,
+&ldquo;Give me your money.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>If you want to develop software in a country that allows software
+patents, and you want to work with patent law, what will you have to
+do?</p>
+
+<p>You could try to make a list of all the ideas that one might be
+able to find in the program that you're about to write, aside from the
+fact that you don't know that when you start writing the program.
+[But] even after you finish writing the program you wouldn't be able
+to make such a list.</p>
+
+<p>The reason is&hellip; in the process you conceived of it in one
+particular way&mdash;you've got a mental structure to apply to your
+design.  And because of that, it will block you from seeing other
+structures that somebody might use to understand the same
+program&mdash;because you're not coming to it fresh; you already
+designed it with one structure in mind.  Someone else who sees it for
+the first time might see a different structure, which involves
+different ideas, and it would be hard for you to see what those other
+ideas are.  But nonetheless they're implemented in your program, and
+those patents could prohibit your program, if those ideas are
+patented.</p>
+
+<p>For instance, suppose there were graphical-idea patents and you
+wanted to draw a square.  Well, you would realize that if there was a
+patent on a bottom edge, it would prohibit your square.  You could put
+&ldquo;bottom edge&rdquo; on the list of all ideas implemented in your
+drawing.  But you might not realize that somebody else with a patent
+on bottom corners could sue you easily also, because he could take
+your drawing and turn it by 45 degrees.  And now your square is like
+this, and it has a bottom corner.</p>
+
+<p>So you couldn't make a list of all the ideas which, if patented,
+could prohibit your program.</p>
+
+<p>What you might try to do is find out all the ideas that are
+patented that might be in your program.  Now you can't do that
+actually, because patent applications are kept secret for at least
+eighteen months; and the result is the Patent Office could be
+considering now whether to issue a patent, and they won't tell you.
+And this is not just an academic, theoretical possibility.</p>
+
+<p>For instance, in 1984 the Compress program was written, a program
+for compressing files using the <abbr title="Lempel-Ziv-Welch">
+LZW</abbr> data compression algorithm, and at that time there was
+no patent on that algorithm for compressing files.  The author got the
+algorithm from an article in a journal.  That was when we thought that
+the purpose of computer science journals was to publish algorithms so
+people could use them.</p>
+
+<p>He wrote this program, he released it, and in 1985 a patent was
+issued on that algorithm.  But the patent holder was cunning and
+didn't immediately go around telling people to stop using it.  The
+patent holder figured, &ldquo;Let's let everybody dig their grave
+deeper.&rdquo; A few years later they started threatening people; it
+became clear we couldn't use Compress, so I asked for people to
+suggest other algorithms we could use for compressing files.</p>
+
+<p>And somebody wrote and said, &ldquo;I developed another data compression
+algorithm that works better, I've written a program, I'd like to give
+it to you.&rdquo;  So we got ready to release it, and a week before it was
+ready to be released, I read in the <cite>New York Times</cite> weekly
+patent column, which I rarely saw&mdash;it's a couple of times a year
+I might see it&mdash;but just by luck I saw that someone had gotten a
+patent for &ldquo;inventing a new method of compressing data.&rdquo;
+And so I said we had better look at this, and sure enough it covered
+the program we were about to release.  But it could have been worse:
+the patent could have been issued a year later, or two years later, or
+three years later, or five years later.</p>
+
+<p>Anyway, someone else came up with another, even better compression
+algorithm, which was used in the program gzip, and just about
+everybody who wanted to compress files switched to gzip, so
+it sounds like a happy ending.  But you'll hear more later.  It's not
+entirely so happy.</p>
+
+<p>So, you can't find out about the patents that are being considered
+even though they may prohibit your work once they come out, but you
+can find out about the already issued patents.  They're all published
+by the Patent Office.  The problem is you can't read them all, because
+there are too many of them.</p>
+
+<p>In the US I believe there are hundreds of thousands of
+software patents; keeping track of them would be a tremendous job.  So
+you're going to have to search for relevant patents.  And you'll find
+a lot of relevant patents, but you won't necessarily find them
+all.</p>
+
+<p>For instance, in the 80s and 90s, there was a patent on
+&ldquo;natural order recalculation&rdquo; in spreadsheets.  Somebody
+once asked me for a copy of it, so I looked in our computer file which
+lists the patent numbers.  And then I pulled out the drawer to get the
+paper copy of this patent and xeroxed it and sent it to him.  And when
+he got it, he said, &ldquo;I think you sent me the wrong patent.  This
+is something about compilers.&rdquo; So I thought maybe our file has
+the wrong number in it.  I looked in it again, and sure enough it said,
+&ldquo;A method for compiling formulas into object code.&rdquo; So I
+started to read it to see if it was indeed the wrong patent.  I read
+the claims, and sure enough it was the natural order recalculation
+patent, but it didn't use those terms.  It didn't use the term
+&ldquo;spreadsheet.&rdquo;  In fact, what the patent prohibited was
+dozens of different ways of implementing topological sort&mdash;all
+the ways they could think of.  But I don't think it used the term
+&ldquo;topological sort.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>So if you were writing a spreadsheet and you tried to find relevant
+patents by searching, you might have found a lot of patents.  But you
+wouldn't have found this one until you told somebody, &ldquo;Oh, I'm
+working on a spreadsheet,&rdquo; and he said, &ldquo;Oh, did you know
+those other companies that are making spreadsheets are getting
+sued?&rdquo; Then you would have found out.</p>
+
+<p>Well, you can't find all the patents by searching, but you can find
+a lot of them.  And then you've got to figure out what they mean,
+which is hard, because patents are written in tortuous legal language
+which is very hard to understand the real meaning of.  So you're going
+to have to spend a lot of time talking with an expensive lawyer
+explaining what you want to do in order to find out from the lawyer
+whether you're allowed to do it.</p>
+
+<p>Even the patent holders often can't recognize just what their
+patents mean.  For instance, there's somebody named Paul Heckel who
+released a program for displaying a lot of data on a small screen, and
+based on a couple of the ideas in that program he got a couple of
+patents.</p>
+
+<p>I once tried to find a simple way to describe what claim 1 of one
+of those patents covered.  I found that I couldn't find any simpler
+way of saying it than what was in the patent itself; and that
+sentence, I couldn't manage to keep it all in my mind at once, no
+matter how hard I tried.</p>
+
+<p>And Heckel couldn't follow it either, because when he saw
+HyperCard, all he noticed was it was nothing like his program.  It
+didn't occur to him that the way his patent was written it might
+prohibit HyperCard; but his lawyer had that idea, so he threatened
+Apple.  And then he threatened Apple's customers, and eventually Apple
+made a settlement with him which is secret, so we don't know who
+really won.  And this is just an illustration of how hard it is for
+anybody to understand what a patent does or doesn't prohibit.</p>
+
+<p>In fact, I once gave this speech and Heckel was in the audience.
+And at this point he jumped up and said, &ldquo;That's not true, I
+just didn't know the scope of my protection.&rdquo; And I said,
+&ldquo;Yeah, that's what I said,&rdquo; at which point he sat down and
+that was the end of my experience being heckled by Heckel.  If I had
+said no, he probably would have found a way to argue with me.</p>
+
+<p>Anyway, after a long, expensive conversation with a lawyer, the
+lawyer will give you an answer like this:</p>
+
+<blockquote><p>If you do something in this area, you're almost certain
+to lose a lawsuit; if you do something in this area, there's a
+considerable chance of losing a lawsuit; and if you really want to be
+safe you've got to stay out of this area.  But there's a sizeable
+element of chance in the outcome of any lawsuit.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>So now that you have clear, predictable rules for doing business,
+what are you actually going to do?  Well, there are three things that
+you could do to deal with the issue of any particular patent.  One is
+to avoid it, another is to get a license for it, and the third is to
+invalidate it.  So I'll talk about these one by one.</p>
+
+<p>First, there's the possibility of avoiding the patent, which means,
+don't implement what it prohibits.  Of course, if it's hard to tell
+what it prohibits, it might be hard to tell what would suffice to
+avoid it.</p>
+
+<p>A couple of years ago Kodak sued Sun [for] using a patent for
+something having to do with object-oriented programming, and Sun
+didn't think it was infringing that patent.  But the court decided it
+was; and when other people look at that patent they haven't the
+faintest idea whether that decision was right or not.  No one can tell
+what that patent does or doesn't cover, but Sun had to pay hundreds of
+millions of dollars because of violating a completely incomprehensible
+law.</p>
+
+<p>Sometimes you can tell what you need to avoid, and sometimes what
+you need to avoid is an algorithm.</p>
+
+<p>For instance, I saw a patent for something like the fast Fourier
+transform, but it ran twice as fast.  Well, if the ordinary FFT is
+fast enough for your application then that's an easy way to avoid this
+other one.  And most of the time that would work.  Once in a while you
+might be trying to do something where it runs doing FFT all the time,
+and it's just barely fast enough using the faster algorithm.  And then
+you can't avoid it, although maybe you could wait a couple of years
+for a faster computer.  But that's going to be rare.  Most of the time
+that patent will to be easy to avoid.</p>
+
+<p>On the other hand, a patent on an algorithm may be impossible to
+avoid.  Consider the LZW data compression algorithm.  Well, as I
+explained, we found a better data compression algorithm, and everybody
+who wanted to compress files switched to the program gzip
+which used the better algorithm.  And the reason is, if you just want
+to compress the file and uncompress it later, you can tell people to
+use this program to uncompress it; then you can use any program with
+any algorithm, and you only care how well it works.</p>
+
+<p>But LZW is used for other things, too; for instance the PostScript
+language specifies operators for LZW compression and LZW
+uncompression.  It's no use having another, better algorithm because
+it makes a different format of data.  They're not interoperable.  If
+you compress it with the gzip algorithm, you won't be able to
+uncompress it using LZW.  So no matter how good your other algorithm
+is, and no matter what it is, it just doesn't enable you to implement
+PostScript according to the specs.</p>
+
+<p>But I noticed that users rarely ask their printers to compress
+things.  Generally the only thing they want their printers to do is to
+uncompress; and I also noticed that both of the patents on the LZW
+algorithm were written in such a way that if your system can only
+uncompress, it's not forbidden.  These patents were written so that
+they covered compression, and they had other claims covering both
+compression and uncompression; but there was no claim covering only
+uncompression.  So I realized that if we implement only the
+uncompression for LZW, we would be safe.  And although it would not
+satisfy the specification, it would please the users sufficiently; it
+would do what they actually needed.  So that's how we barely squeaked
+by avoiding the two patents.</p>
+
+<p>Now there is GIF format, for images.  That uses the LZW
+algorithm also.  It didn't take long for people to define another
+image format, called PNG, which stands for &ldquo;PNG's Not
+GIF.&rdquo;  I think it uses the gzip algorithm.  And we
+started saying to people, &ldquo;Don't use GIF format, it's
+dangerous.  Switch to PNG.&rdquo; And the users said,
+&ldquo;Well, maybe some day, but the browsers don't implement it
+yet,&rdquo; and the browser developers said, &ldquo;We may implement
+it someday, but there's not much demand from users.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Well, it's pretty obvious what's going on&mdash;GIF was a
+de facto standard.  In effect, asking people to switch to a different
+format, instead of their de facto standard, is like asking everyone in
+New Zealand to speak Hungarian.  People will say, &ldquo;Well, yeah,
+I'll learn to speak it after everyone else does.&rdquo; And so we
+never succeeded in asking people to stop using GIF, even
+though one of those patent holders was going around to operators of
+web sites, threatening to sue them unless they could prove that all of
+the GIFs on the site were made with authorized, licensed
+software.</p>
+
+<p>So GIF was a dangerous trap for a large part of our
+community.  We thought we had an alternative to GIF format,
+namely JPEG, but then somebody said, &ldquo;I was just looking
+through my portfolio of patents&rdquo;&mdash;I think it was somebody that
+just bought patents and used them to threaten people&mdash;and he
+said, &ldquo;and I found that one of them covers JPEG format.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Well, JPEG was not a de facto standard, it's an official
+standard, issued by a standards committee; and the committee had a
+lawyer too.  Their lawyer said he didn't think that this patent
+actually covered JPEG format.</p>
+
+<p>So who's right?  Well, this patent holder sued a bunch of
+companies, and if there was a decision, it would have said who was
+right.  But I haven't heard about a decision; I'm not sure if there
+ever was one.  I think they settled, and the settlement is almost
+certainly secret, which means that it didn't tell us anything about
+who's right.</p>
+
+<p>These are fairly lightweight cases: one patent on JPEG,
+two patents on the LZW algorithm used in GIF.  Now you might
+wonder how come there are two patents on the same algorithm?  It's not
+supposed to happen, but it did.  And the reason is that the patent
+examiners can't possibly take the time to study every pair of things
+they might need to study and compare, because they're not allowed to
+take that much time.  And because algorithms are just mathematics,
+there's no way you can narrow down which applications and patents you
+need to compare.</p>
+
+<p>You see, in physical engineering fields, they can use the physical
+nature of what's going on to narrow things down.  For instance, in
+chemical engineering, they can say, &ldquo;What are the substances
+going in?  What are the substances coming out?&rdquo; If two different
+[patent] applications are different in that way, then they're not the
+same process so you don't need to worry.  But the same math can be
+represented in ways that can look very different, and until you study
+them both together, you don't realize they're talking about the same
+thing.  And, because of this, it's quite common to see the same thing
+get patented multiple times [in software].</p>
+
+<p>Remember that program that was killed by a patent before we
+released it?  Well, that algorithm got patented twice also.  In one
+little field we've seen it happen in two cases that we ran
+into&mdash;the same algorithm being patented twice.  Well, I think my
+explanation tells you why that happens.</p>
+
+<p>But one or two patents is a lightweight case.  What
+about MPEG2, the video format?  I saw a list of over 70
+patents covering that, and the negotiations to arrange a way for
+somebody to license all those patents took longer than developing the
+standard itself.  The JPEG committee wanted to develop a
+follow-on standard, and they gave up.  They said there were too many
+patents; there was no way to do it.</p>
+
+<p>Sometimes it's a feature that's patented, and the only way to avoid
+that patent is not to implement that feature.  For instance, the users
+of the word processor Xywrite once got a downgrade in the mail, which
+removed a feature.  The feature was that you could define a list of
+abbreviations.  For instance, if you define &ldquo;exp&rdquo; as an
+abbreviation for &ldquo;experiment,&rdquo; then if you type
+&ldquo;exp-space&ldquo; or &ldquo;exp-comma,&rdquo; the
+&ldquo;exp&rdquo; would change automatically to
+&ldquo;experiment.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Then somebody who had a patent on this feature threatened them, and
+they concluded that the only thing they could do was to take the
+feature out.  And so they sent all the users a downgrade.</p>
+
+<p>But they also contacted me, because my Emacs editor had a feature
+like that starting from the late 70s.  And it was described in the
+Emacs manual, so they thought I might be able to help them invalidate
+that patent.  Well, I'm happy to know I've had at least one patentable
+idea in my life, but I'm unhappy that someone else patented it.</p>
+
+<p>Fortunately, in fact, that patent was eventually invalidated, and
+partly on the strength of the fact that I had published using it
+earlier.  But in the meantime they had had to remove this feature.</p>
+
+<p>Now, to remove one or two features may not be a disaster.  But when
+you have to remove 50 features, you could do it, but people are likely
+to say, &ldquo;This program's no good; it's missing all the features I
+want.&rdquo; So it may not be a solution.  And sometimes a patent is
+so broad that it wipes out an entire field, like the patent on
+public-key encryption, which in fact put public-key encryption
+basically off limits for about ten years.</p>
+
+<p>So that's the option of avoiding the patent&mdash;often possible,
+but sometimes not, and there's a limit to how many patents you can
+avoid.</p>
+
+<p>What about the next possibility, of getting a license for the
+patent?</p>
+
+<p>Well, the patent holder may not offer you a license.  It's entirely
+up to him.  He could say, &ldquo;I just want to shut you down.&rdquo;
+I once got a letter from somebody whose family business was making
+casino games, which were of course computerized, and he had been
+threatened by a patent holder who wanted to make his business shut
+down.  He sent me the patent.  Claim 1 was something like &ldquo;a
+network with a multiplicity of computers, in which each computer
+supports a multiplicity of games, and allows a multiplicity of game
+sessions at the same time.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Now, I'm sure in the 1980s there was a university that set up a
+room with a network of workstations, and each workstation had some
+kind of windowing facility.  All they had to do was to install
+multiple games and it would be possible to display multiple game
+sessions at once.  This is so trivial and uninteresting that nobody
+would have bothered to publish an article about doing it.  No one
+would have been interested in publishing an article about doing it,
+but it was worth patenting it.  If it had occurred to you that you
+could get a monopoly on this trivial thing, then you could shut down
+your competitors with it.</p>
+
+<p>But why does the Patent Office issue so many patents that seem
+absurd and trivial to us?</p>
+
+<p>It's not because the patent examiners are stupid, it's because
+they're following a system, and the system has rules, and the rules
+lead to this result.</p>
+
+<p>You see, if somebody has made a machine that does something once,
+and somebody else designs a machine that will do the same thing, but N
+times, for us that's a <code>for</code>-loop, but for the Patent Office
+that's an invention.  If there are machines that can do A, and there
+are machines that can do B, and somebody designs a machine that can do
+A or B, for us that's an <code>if-then-else</code> statement, but for the
+Patent Office that's an invention.  So they have very low standards,
+and they follow those standards; and the result is patents that look
+absurd and trivial to us.  Whether they're legally valid I can't say.
+But every programmer who sees them laughs.</p>
+
+<p>In any case, I was unable to suggest anything he could do to help
+himself, and he had to shut down his business.  But most patent
+holders will offer you a license.  It's likely to be rather
+expensive.</p>
+
+<p>But there are some software developers that find it particularly
+easy to get licenses, most of the time.  Those are the
+megacorporations.  In any field the megacorporations generally own
+about half the patents, and they cross-license each other, and they
+can make anybody else cross-license if he's really producing anything.
+The result is that they end up painlessly with licenses for almost all
+the patents.</p>
+
+<p>IBM wrote an article in its house magazine, <cite>Think</cite>
+magazine&mdash;I think it's issue 5, 1990&mdash;about the benefit IBM
+got from its almost 9,000 US patents at the time (now it's up to
+45,000 or more).  They said that one of the benefits was that they
+collected money, but the main benefit, which they said was perhaps an
+order of magnitude greater, was &ldquo;getting access to the patents
+of others,&rdquo; namely cross-licensing.</p>
+
+<p>What this means is since IBM, with so many patents, can make almost
+everybody give them a cross-license, IBM avoids almost all the grief
+that the patent system would have inflicted on anybody else.  So
+that's why IBM wants software patents.  That's why the
+megacorporations in general want software patents, because they know
+that by cross-licensing, they will have a sort of exclusive club on
+top of a mountain peak.  And all the rest of us will be down here, and
+there's no way we can get up there.  You know, if you're a genius, you
+might start up a small company and get some patents, but you'll never
+get into IBM's league, no matter what you do.</p>
+
+<p>Now a lot of companies tell their employees, &ldquo;Get us patents
+so we can defend ourselves&rdquo; and they mean, &ldquo;use them to
+try to get cross-licensing,&rdquo; but it just doesn't work well.
+It's not an effective strategy if you've got a small number of
+patents.</p>
+
+<p>Suppose you've got three patents.  One points there, one points
+there, and one points there, and somebody over there points a patent
+at you.  Well, your three patents don't help you at all, because none
+of them points at him.  On the other hand, sooner or later, somebody
+in the company is going to notice that this patent is actually
+pointing at some people, and [the company] could threaten them and
+squeeze money out of them&mdash;never mind that those people didn't
+attack this company.</p>
+
+<p>So if your employer says to you, &ldquo;We need some patents to
+defend ourselves, so help us get patents,&rdquo; I recommend this
+response:</p>
+
+<blockquote><p>Boss, I trust you and I'm sure you would only use those
+patents to defend the company if it's attacked.  But I don't know
+who's going to be the CEO of this company in five years.  For all I
+know, it might get acquired by Microsoft.  So I really can't trust the
+company's word to only use these patents for defense unless I get it
+in writing.  Please put it in writing that any patents I provide for
+the company will only be used for self-defense and collective
+security, and not for repression, and then I'll be able to get patents
+for the company with a clean conscience.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>It would be most interesting to raise this not just in private with
+your boss, but also on the company's discussion list.</p>
+
+<p>The other thing that could happen is that the company could fail
+and its assets could be auctioned off, including the patents; and the
+patents will be bought by someone who means to use them to do
+something nasty.</p>
+
+<p>This cross-licensing practice is very important to understand,
+because this is what punctures the argument of the software patent
+advocates who say that software patents are needed to protect the
+starving genius.  They give you a scenario which is a series of
+unlikelihoods.</p>
+
+<p>So let's look at it.  According to this scenario, there's a
+brilliant designer of whatever, who's been working for years by
+himself in his attic coming up with a better way to do whatever it is.
+And now that it's ready, he wants to start a business and mass-produce
+this thing; and because his idea is so good his company will
+inevitably succeed&mdash;except for one thing: the big companies will
+compete with him and take all his market the away.  And because of
+this, his business will almost certainly fail, and then he will
+starve.</p>
+
+<p>Well, let's look at all the unlikely assumptions here.</p>
+
+<p>First of all, that he comes up with this idea working by himself.
+That's not very likely.  In a high-tech field, most progress is made
+by people working in a field, doing things and talking with people in
+the field.  But I wouldn't say it's impossible, not that one thing by
+itself.</p>
+
+<p>But anyway the next supposition is that he's going to start a
+business and that it's going to succeed.  Well, just because he's a
+brilliant engineer doesn't mean that he's any good at running a
+business.  Most new businesses fail; more than 95 percent of them, I think,
+fail within a few years.  So that's probably what's going to happen to
+him, no matter what.</p>
+
+<p>Ok, let's assume that in addition to being a brilliant engineer who
+came up with something great by himself, he's also talented at running
+businesses.  If he has a knack for running businesses, then maybe his
+business won't fail.  After all, not all new businesses fail, there
+are a certain few that succeed.  Well, if he understands business,
+then instead of trying to go head to head with large companies, he
+might try to do things that small companies are better at and have a
+better chance of succeeding.  He might succeed.  But let's suppose it
+fails anyway.  If he's so brilliant and has a knack for running
+businesses, I'm sure he won't starve, because somebody will want to
+give him a job.</p>
+
+<p>So a series of unlikelihoods&mdash;it's not a very plausible
+scenario.  But let's look at it anyway.</p>
+
+<p>Because where they go from there is to say the patent system will
+&ldquo;protect&rdquo; our starving genius, because he can get a patent
+on this technique.  And then when IBM wants to compete with him, he
+says, &ldquo;IBM, you can't compete with me, because I've got this
+patent,&rdquo; and IBM says, &ldquo;Oh, no, not again!&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Well, here's what really happens.</p>
+
+<p>IBM says, &ldquo;Oh, how nice, you have a patent.  Well, we have
+this patent, and this patent, and this patent, and this patent, and
+this patent, all of which cover other ideas implemented in your
+product, and if you think you can fight us on all those, we'll pull
+out some more.  So let's sign a cross-license agreement, and that way
+nobody will get hurt.&rdquo; Now since we've assumed that our genius
+understands business, he's going to realize that he has no choice.
+He's going to sign the cross-license agreement, as just about
+everybody does when IBM demands it.  And then this means that IBM will
+get &ldquo;access&rdquo; to his patent, meaning IBM would be free to
+compete with him just as if there were no patents, which means that
+the supposed benefit that they claim he would get by having this
+patent is not real.  He won't get this benefit.</p>
+
+<p>The patent might &ldquo;protect&rdquo; him from competition from
+you or me, but not from IBM&mdash;not from the very megacorporations
+which the scenario says are the threat to him.  You know in advance
+that there's got to be a flaw in this reasoning when people who are
+lobbyists for megacorporations recommend a policy supposedly because
+it's going to protect their small competitors from them.  If it really
+were going to do that, they wouldn't be in favor of it.  But this
+explains why [software patents] won't do it.</p>
+
+<p>Even IBM can't always do this, because there are companies that we
+refer to as patent trolls or patent parasites, and their only business
+is using patents to squeeze money out of people who really make
+something.</p>
+
+<p>Patent lawyers tell us that it's really wonderful to have patents
+in your field, but they don't have patents in their field.  There are
+no patents on how to send or write a threatening letter, no patents on
+how to file a lawsuit, and no patents on how to persuade a judge or
+jury, so even IBM can't make the patent trolls cross-license.  But IBM
+figures, &ldquo;Our competition will have to pay them too; this is
+just part of the cost of doing business, and we can live with
+it.&rdquo; IBM and the other megacorporations figure that the general
+dominion over all activity that they get from their patents is good
+for them, and paying off the trolls they can live with.  So that's why
+they want software patents.</p>
+
+<p>There are also certain software developers who find it particularly
+difficult to get a patent license, and those are the developers of
+free software.  The reason is that the usual patent license has
+conditions we can't possibly fulfill, because usual patent licenses
+demand a payment per copy.  But when software gives users the freedom
+to distribute and make more copies, we have no way to count the copies
+that exist.</p>
+
+<p>If someone offered me a patent license for a payment of
+one-millionth of a dollar per copy, the total amount of money I'd have
+to pay maybe is in my pocket now.  Maybe it's 50 dollars, but I don't
+know if it's 50 dollars, or 49, or what, because there's no way I can
+count the copies that people have made.</p>
+
+<p>A patent holder doesn't have to demand a payment per copy; a patent
+holder could offer you a license for a single lump sum, but those lump
+sums tend to be big, like US$100,000.</p>
+
+<p>And the reason that we've been able to develop so much
+freedom-respecting software is [that] we can develop software without
+money, but we can't pay a lot of money without money.  If we're forced
+to pay for the privilege of writing software for the public, we won't
+be able to do it very much.</p>
+
+<p>That's the possibility of getting a license for the patent.  The
+other possibility is to invalidate the patent.  If the country
+considers software patents to be basically valid, and allowed, the
+only question is whether that particular patent meets the criteria.
+It's only useful to go to court if you've got an argument to make that
+might prevail.</p>
+
+<p>What would that argument be?  You have to find evidence that, years
+ago, before the patent was applied for, people knew about the same
+idea.  And you'd have to find things today that demonstrate that they
+knew about it publicly at that time.  So the dice were cast years ago,
+and if they came up favorably for you, and if you can prove that fact
+today, then you have an argument to use to try to invalidate the
+patent.  And it might work.</p>
+
+<p>It might cost you a lot of money to go through this case, and as a
+result, a probably invalid patent is a very frightening weapon to be
+threatened with if you don't have a lot of money.  There are people
+who can't afford to defend their rights&mdash;lots of them.  The ones
+who can afford it are the exception.</p>
+
+<p>These are the three things that you might be able to do about each
+patent that prohibits something in your program.  The thing is,
+whether each one is possible depends on different details of the
+circumstances, so some of the time, none of them is possible; and when
+that happens, your project is dead.</p>
+
+<p>But lawyers in most countries tell us, &ldquo;Don't try to find the
+patents in advance,&rdquo; and the reason is that the penalty for
+infringement is bigger if you knew about the patent.  So what they
+tell you is &ldquo;Keep your eyes shut.  Don't try to find out about
+the patents, just go blindly taking your design decisions, and
+hope.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>And of course, with each single design decision, you probably don't
+step on a patent.  Probably nothing happens to you.  But there are so
+many steps you have to take to get across the minefield, it's very
+unlikely you will get through safely.  And of course, the patent
+holders don't all show up at the same time, so you don't know how many
+there are going to be.</p>
+
+<p>The patent holder of the natural order recalculation patent was
+demanding 5 percent of the gross sales of every spreadsheet.  You could
+imagine paying for a few such licenses, but what happens when patent
+holder number 20 comes along, and wants you to pay out the last
+remaining 5 percent?  And then what happens when patent holder number 21
+comes along?</p>
+
+<p>People in business say that this scenario is amusing but absurd,
+because your business would fail long before you got there.  They told
+me that two or three such licenses would make your business fail.  So
+you'd never get to 20.  They show up one by one, so you never know how
+many more there are going to be.</p>
+
+<p>Software patents are a mess.  They're a mess for software
+developers, but in addition they're a restriction on every computer
+user because software patents restrict what you can do on your
+computer.</p>
+
+<p>This is very different from patents, for instance, on automobile
+engines.  These only restrict companies that make cars; they don't
+restrict you and me.  But software patents do restrict you and me, and
+everybody who uses computers.  So we can't think of them in purely
+economic terms; we can't judge this issue purely in economic terms.
+There's something more important at stake.</p>
+
+<p>But even in economic terms, the system is self-defeating, because
+its purpose is supposed to be to promote progress.  Supposedly by
+creating this artificial incentive for people to publish ideas, it's
+going to help the field progress.  But all it does is the exact
+opposite, because the big job in software is not coming up with ideas,
+it's implementing thousands of ideas together in one program.  And
+software patents obstruct that, so they're economically
+self-defeating.</p>
+
+<p>And there's even economic research showing that this is
+so&mdash;showing how in a field with a lot of incremental innovation,
+a patent system can actually reduce investment in R &amp; D.  And of
+course, it also obstructs development in other ways.  So even if we
+ignore the injustice of software patents, even if we were to look at
+it in the narrow economic terms that are usually proposed, it's still
+harmful.</p>
+
+<p>People sometimes respond by saying that &ldquo;People in other
+fields have been living with patents for decades, and they've gotten
+used to it, so why should you be an exception?&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Now, that question has an absurd assumption.  It's like saying,
+&ldquo;Other people get cancer, why shouldn't you?&rdquo; I think
+every time someone doesn't get cancer, that's good, regardless of what
+happened to the others.  That question is absurd because of its
+presupposition that somehow we all have a duty to suffer the harm done
+by patents.</p>
+
+<p>But there is a sensible question buried inside it, and that
+sensible question is &ldquo;What differences are there between various
+fields that might affect what is good or bad patent policy in those
+fields?&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>There is an important basic difference between fields in regard to
+how many patents are likely to prohibit or cover parts of any one
+product.</p>
+
+<p>Now we have a naive idea in our minds which I'm trying to get rid
+of, because it's not true.  And it's that on any one product there is
+one patent, and that patent covers the overall design of that product.
+So if you design a new product, it can't be patented already, and you
+will have an opportunity to get &ldquo;the patent&rdquo; on that
+product.</p>
+
+<p>That's not how things work.  In the 1800s, maybe they did, but not
+now.  In fact, fields fall on a spectrum of how many patents [there
+are] per product.  The beginning of the spectrum is one, but no field
+is like that today; fields are at various places on this spectrum.</p>
+
+<p>The field that's closest to that is pharmaceuticals.  A few decades
+ago, there really was one patent per pharmaceutical, at least at any
+time, because the patent covered the entire chemical formula of that
+one particular substance.  Back then, if you developed a new drug, you
+could be sure it wasn't already patented by somebody else and you
+could get the one patent on that drug.</p>
+
+<p>But that's not how it works now.  Now there are broader patents, so
+now you could develop a new drug, and you're not allowed to make it
+because somebody has a broader patent which covers it already.</p>
+
+<p>And there might even be a few such patents covering your new drug
+simultaneously, but there won't be hundreds.  The reason is, our
+ability to do biochemical engineering is so limited that nobody knows
+how to combine so many ideas to make something that's useful in
+medicine.  If you can combine a couple of them you're doing pretty
+well at our level of knowledge.  But other fields involve combining
+more ideas to make one thing.</p>
+
+<p>At the other end of the spectrum is software, where we can combine
+more ideas into one usable design than anybody else, because our field
+is basically easier than all other fields.  I'm presuming that the
+intelligence of people in our field is the same as that of people in
+physical engineering.  It's not that we're fundamentally better than
+they are; it's that our field is fundamentally easier, because we're
+working with mathematics.</p>
+
+<p>A program is made out of mathematical components, which have a
+definition, whereas physical objects don't have a definition.  The
+matter does what it does, so through the perversity of matter, your
+design may not work the way it &ldquo;should&rdquo; have worked.  And that's 
just
+tough.  You can't say that the matter has a bug in it, and the
+physical universe should get fixed.  [Whereas] we [programmers] can
+make a castle that rests on a mathematically thin line, and it stays
+up because nothing weighs anything.</p>
+
+<p>There're so many complications you have to cope with in physical
+engineering that we don't have to worry about.</p>
+
+<p>For instance, when I put an <code>if</code>-statement inside of
+a <code>while</code>-loop,
+</p>
+
+<ul>
+<li>I don't have to worry that if this <code>while</code>-loop repeats
+  at the wrong rate, the <code>if</code>-statement might start to
+  vibrate and it might resonate and crack;</li>
+
+<li>I don't have to worry that if it resonates much faster&mdash;you
+  know, millions of times per second&mdash;that it might generate
+  radio frequency signals that might induce wrong values in other
+  parts of the program;</li>
+
+<li>I don't have to worry that corrosive fluids from the environment
+  might seep in between the <code>if</code>-statement and
+  the <code>while</code>-statement and start eating away at them until
+  the signals don't pass anymore;</li>
+
+<li>I don't have to worry about how the heat generated by my
+  <code>if</code>-statement is going to get out through
+  the <code>while</code>-statement so that it doesn't make
+  the <code>if</code>-statement burn out; and</li>
+
+<li>I don't have to worry about how I would take out the broken
+  <code>if</code>-statement if it does crack, burn, or corrode, and
+  replace it with another <code>if</code>-statement to make the
+  program run again.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>For that matter, I don't have to worry about how I'm going to
+insert the <code>if</code>-statement inside
+the <code>while</code>-statement every time I produce a copy of the
+program.  I don't have to design a factory to make copies of my
+program, because there are various general commands that will make
+copies of anything.</p>
+
+<p>If I want to make copies on CD, I just have to write a master; and
+there's one program I can [use to] make a master out of anything,
+write any data I want.  I can make a master CD and write it and send
+it off to a factory, and they'll duplicate whatever I send them.  I
+don't have to design a different factory for each thing I want to
+duplicate.</p>
+
+<p>Very often with physical engineering you have to do that; you have
+to design products for manufacturability.  Designing the factory may
+even be a bigger job than designing the product, and then you may have
+to spend millions of dollars to build the factory.  So with all of
+this trouble, you're not going to be able to put together so many
+different ideas in one product and have it work.</p>
+
+<p>A physical design with a million nonrepeating different design
+elements is a gigantic project.  A program with a million different
+design elements, that's nothing.  It's a few hundred thousand lines of
+code, and a few people will write that in a few years, so it's not a
+big deal.  So the result is that the patent system weighs
+proportionately heavier on us than it does on people in any other
+field who are being held back by the perversity of matter.</p>
+
+<p>A lawyer did a study of one particular large program, namely the
+kernel Linux, which is used together with the GNU operating system
+that I launched.  This was five years ago now; he found 283 different
+US patents, each of which appeared to prohibit some computation done
+somewhere in the code of Linux.  At the time I saw an article saying
+that Linux was 0.25 percent of the whole system.  So by multiplying 300 by
+400 we can estimate the number of patents that would prohibit
+something in the whole system as being around 100,000.  This is a very
+rough estimate only, and no more accurate information is available,
+since trying to figure it out would be a gigantic task.</p>
+
+<p>Now this lawyer did not publish the list of patents, because that
+would have endangered the developers of Linux the kernel, putting them
+in a position where the penalties if they were sued would be greater.
+He didn't want to hurt them; he wanted to demonstrate how bad this
+problem is, of patent gridlock.</p>
+
+<p>Programmers can understand this immediately, but politicians
+usually don't know much about programming; they usually imagine that
+patents are basically much like copyrights, only somehow stronger.
+They imagine that since software developers are not endangered by the
+copyrights on their work, that they won't be endangered by the patents
+on their work either.  They imagine that, since when you write a
+program you have the copyright, [therefore likewise] if you write a
+program you have the patents also.  This is false&mdash;so how do we
+give them a clue what patents would really do?  What they really do in
+countries like the US?</p>
+
+<p>I find it's useful to make an analogy between software and
+symphonies.  Here's why it's a good analogy.</p>
+
+<p>A program or symphony combines many ideas.  A symphony combines
+many musical ideas.  But you can't just pick a bunch of ideas and say
+&ldquo;Here's my combination of ideas, do you like it?&rdquo; Because
+in order to make them work you have to implement them all.  You can't
+just pick musical ideas and list them and say, &ldquo;Hey, how do you
+like this combination?&rdquo; You can't hear that [list].  You have to
+write notes which implement all these ideas together.</p>
+
+<p>The hard task, the thing most of us wouldn't be any good at, is
+writing all these notes to make the whole thing sound good.  Sure,
+lots of us could pick musical ideas out of a list, but we wouldn't
+know how to write a good-sounding symphony to implement those ideas.
+Only some of us have that talent.  That's the thing that limits you.
+I could probably invent a few musical ideas, but I wouldn't know how
+to use them to any effect.</p>
+
+<p>So imagine that it's the 1700s, and the governments of Europe
+decide that they want to promote the progress of symphonic music by
+establishing a system of musical idea patents, so that any musical
+idea described in words could be patented.</p>
+
+<p>For instance, using a particular sequence of notes as a motif could
+be patented, or a chord progression could be patented, or a rhythmic
+pattern could be patented, or using certain instruments by themselves
+could be patented, or a format of repetitions in a movement could be
+patented.  Any sort of musical idea that could be described in words
+would have been patentable.</p>
+
+<p>Now imagine that it's 1800 and you're Beethoven, and you want to
+write a symphony.  You're going to find it's much harder to write a
+symphony you don't get sued for than to write one that sounds good,
+because you have to thread your way around all the patents that exist.
+If you complained about this, the patent holders would say, &ldquo;Oh,
+Beethoven, you're just jealous because we had these ideas first.  Why
+don't you go and think of some ideas of your own?&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Now Beethoven had ideas of his own.  The reason he's considered a
+great composer is because of all of the new ideas that he had, and he
+actually used.  And he knew how to use them in such a way that they
+would work, which was to combine them with lots of well-known ideas.
+He could put a few new ideas into a composition together with a lot of
+old and uncontroversial ideas.  And the result was a piece that was
+controversial, but not so much so that people couldn't get used to
+it.</p>
+
+<p>To us, Beethoven's music doesn't sound controversial; I'm told it
+was, when it was new.  But because he combined his new ideas with a
+lot of known ideas, he was able to give people a chance to stretch a
+certain amount.  And they could, which is why to us those ideas sound
+just fine.  But nobody, not even a Beethoven, is such a genius that he
+could reinvent music from zero, not using any of the well-known ideas,
+and make something that people would want to listen to.  And nobody is
+such a genius he could reinvent computing from zero, not using any of
+the well-known ideas, and make something that people want to use.</p>
+
+<p>When the technological context changes so frequently, you end up
+with a situation where what was done 20 years ago is totally
+inadequate.  Twenty years ago there was no World Wide Web.  So, sure,
+people did a lot of things with computers back then, but what they
+want to do today are things that work with the World Wide Web.  And
+you can't do that using only the ideas that were known 20 years ago.
+And I presume that the technological context will continue to change,
+creating fresh opportunities for somebody to get patents that give the
+shaft to the whole field.</p>
+
+<p>Big companies can even do this themselves.  For instance, a few
+years ago Microsoft decided to make a phony open standard for
+documents and to get it approved as a standard by corrupting the
+International Standards Organization, which they did.  But they
+designed it using something that Microsoft had patented.  Microsoft is
+big enough that it can start with a patent, design a format or
+protocol to use that patented idea (whether it's helpful or not), in
+such a way that there's no way to be compatible unless you use that
+same idea too.  And then Microsoft can make that a de facto standard
+with or without help from corrupted standards bodies.  Just by its
+weight it can push people into using that format, and that basically
+means that they get a stranglehold over the whole world.  So we need
+to show the politicians what's really going on here.  We need to show
+them why this is bad.</p>
+
+<p>Now I've heard it said that the reason New Zealand is considering
+software patents is that one large company wants to be given some
+monopolies.  To restrict everyone in the country so that one company
+will make more money is the absolute opposite of statesmanship.</p>
+
+<p>So, at this point, I'd like to ask for questions.</p></dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>What is the alternative?</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>No software patents.  I know that that works fine.  I was in the
+field when there were no software patents.  And that meant people
+developed software, and they distributed that software in various
+ways, and they didn't have to worry about getting sued by patent
+holders for doing it, so they were safe.  Software patents don't solve
+a real problem, so we don't need to ask what other solution is
+there.</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>How do the developers get rewarded?</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd><p>Many ways.  Software patents have nothing to do with that.
+Remember if you're a software developer, software patents don't help
+you get whatever you want to get.</p>
+
+<p>Different software developers want different things.  I developed
+some important software in the 1980s, and the reward I wanted was to
+see people using computers in freedom.  And I got that reward,
+although not totally, not everybody has freedom.  But software patents
+would only have stopped me.</p>
+
+<p>Other people developed programs because they wanted money.
+Software patents threaten them, too, and still threaten them, because
+you're not going to make any money if patent holders demand that you
+give it all to them, or if they make you shut down.</p></dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>How do you prevent plagiarism and still&hellip;</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd><p>Plagiarism has nothing to do with this issue.  It has
+absolutely nothing to do with this issue.</p>
+
+<p>Plagiarism means copying the text of a work and claiming to have
+written it yourself.  But patents are not concerned with the text of
+any particular work.  They simply have nothing to do with this.</p>
+
+<p>If you write a work and this work embodies some ideas, which it
+always does, there's no reason to think that the patents covering
+those ideas would belong to you.  They're more likely to belong to
+lots of others, and half of them to the megacorporations, and they can
+then all sue you.  So you don't even have to worry [about plagiarism];
+long before you get to the point where somebody else might copy it,
+you're going to be getting the shaft.</p>
+
+<p>You are confusing patents with copyrights, I'm afraid.  They have
+nothing in common.  I've explained to you what the patent system does
+to software, but I think you don't believe me because you've heard
+what copyrights do and you're confusing the two, so these impressions
+you've got about what copyrights do, you're just assuming that patents
+do them also&mdash;and they don't.  If you write some code, the
+copyright on that code would belong to you; but if your code
+implements ideas, if some of these ideas are patented, those patents
+belong to others who could then sue you.</p>
+
+<p>You don't have to be afraid, with copyright, that when you write
+code yourself, that somebody else already has a copyright on it and
+can sue you, because copyright only restricts copying.  In fact, even
+if you write something which is identical to what somebody else wrote,
+if you can prove you didn't copy it, that's a defense under copyright
+law, because copyright law is only concerned with copying.  But
+copyright law is only concerned with the details of authorship of a
+work [i.e., not the ideas it embodies], so it has nothing in common
+with patent law in terms of what it deals with, and the effects are
+totally different.</p>
+
+<p>Now I'm not in favor personally of all the things that people do
+with copyright law, I've criticized it.  But it's a totally different,
+unrelated issue.  If you think that patent law helps somebody who is
+developing software, it means that you have got a completely wrong
+picture of what patent law actually does.</p></dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>Don't get me wrong.  I'm on your side.</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>OK, but still you've got a wrong picture.  I'm not blaming you for
+it, because you've just been misinformed.</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>If I'm writing software for commercial purposes, do I get good
+protection by treating it as a black box and keeping it secret?</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>I don't want to discuss that question because I'm not in favor of
+it, I think it's unethical to do that, but that's an unrelated
+issue.</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>I understand that.</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>I don't want to change the subject and then praise something that
+I think is bad.  But because it's a change of subject I'd rather not
+get into that.</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>Our Foundation for Research, Science, and Technology, I think
+they're probably the equivalent of your National Science Foundation,
+provides grants for research and development and one of the things
+that they propose pretty actively is that ideas that they have funded
+should be secured if possible by patents.</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>That shouldn't be the case in software, because software ideas
+shouldn't be patentable ever by anyone.  But what you are seeing
+there, more generally, is an example of the general corruption of our
+society by putting commercial aims above all others.  Now I'm not a
+communist and I don't want to abolish business, but when it becomes
+business above all, every aspect of life oriented towards business,
+that is dangerous.</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>So Richard, if you talk to the Foundation, perhaps you might
+propose that there are better ways for a small country like New
+Zealand to make money on software.</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>Software patents don't help anybody make money out of software.
+They mean that you're in danger of getting sued when you try.</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>Which makes it difficult for New Zealand as a country to build an
+economic base using software as part of that.</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>Sorry, when you say &ldquo;which&rdquo; I don't know what you are
+referring to.  Software patents will make it difficult for anyone.  If
+New Zealand allows software patents, that will make it difficult in
+New Zealand for anybody to develop programs and distribute them,
+because you'll be in danger of getting sued.  Software patents have
+nothing to do with developing a program and then putting it to some
+use.</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>So New Zealand, in terms of its economic development, it would be
+better protected by having no software patents.</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd><p>Yes.  You see, each country has its own patent system, and they
+work independently, except that countries have signed up to a treaty
+that says, &ldquo;If you have got a patent in that country, you can
+basically bring your application over here, and we'll judge it based
+on the year you applied for it over there.&rdquo;  But other than that, each
+country has its own criteria for what can be patented and has its own
+set of patents.</p>
+
+<p>So the result is if the US allows software patents and New Zealand
+does not, that means that everybody in the world, including New
+Zealanders, can get US software patents and sue us poor Americans at
+home.  But if New Zealand doesn't allow software patents that means
+that neither you nor we can get New Zealand software patents to sue
+you New Zealanders at home.  You can be sure that almost all the
+software patents will belong to foreigners who will use them to
+basically kick any New Zealand software developers whenever they get
+the chance.</p></dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>Since the Hughes Aircraft case, I think it was in the 1990s</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>I don't know about that case.</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>But basically New Zealand's had software patents.  It's not like
+we're going into a field where we don't already have them, we do.</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd><p>I don't know, but I'm told that there's a decision being made
+now at the legislative level of whether to allow them.  But Patent
+Offices often respond to lobbying from megacorporations through
+WIPO.</p>
+
+<p>WIPO, as you can tell from its name, which is the World
+Intellectual Property Organization, is up to no good, because any use
+of that term is spreading confusion.  WIPO gets a lot of its funds
+from megacorporations, and uses those funds to bring officials from
+Patent Offices to idyllic resort destinations for training.  What they
+train them to do is twist the law to allow patents in areas where
+they're not supposed to be allowed.</p>
+
+<p>In many countries there are laws and court decisions which say that
+software as such can't be patented, algorithms can't be patented, or
+&ldquo;mathematical&rdquo; algorithms can't be patented (no one's
+quite sure what it means for an algorithm to be mathematical or not),
+and various other criteria which if interpreted naturally would rule
+out software patents, but the patent offices twist the law to allow
+them anyway.</p>
+
+<p>For instance, a lot of things which practically speaking are
+software patents have the form where they describe a system involving
+a central processing unit, a memory, input/output facilities,
+instruction-fetching facilities, and means to perform this particular
+computation.  In effect they've written explicitly into the patent all
+the parts of an ordinary computer, and then they say, &ldquo;Well,
+this is a physical system which we would like to patent,&rdquo; but
+really it's just patenting certain software on a computer.  There are
+many subterfuges that they've used.</p>
+
+<p>Patent Offices will generally try to twist the law into allowing
+more patents.  In the US software patents were created by a court
+decision in 1982, in the Appeals Court that deals with all patent
+cases, which misunderstood a Supreme Court decision from the previous
+year, and misapplied it.  Now it looks like that Appeals Court has
+finally changed its mind, and it's come to the conclusion that it was
+mistaken all along; and it looks like this decision will get rid of
+all software patents, unless the Supreme Court reverses it.  The
+Supreme Court is now considering it, and within less than a year we
+should find out whether we've won or lost.</p></dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>Should that case be unsuccessful, is there any movement in the
+States to take a legislated solution?</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>Yes, and I been promoting this for about 19 years now.  It's a
+battle that we fight over and over in various different
+countries.</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>Where in your universe do you put the in I4i case?</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>I have no idea what that is.</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>It's where Microsoft has basically almost had to shut down on
+selling Word, because they were found to have infringed a Canadian
+patent.</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>Oh, that one.  That's just an example of how dangerous software
+patents are to all software developers.  I don't like what Microsoft
+does, but that's an issue that's irrelevant for this purpose.  It's
+not good that somebody can sue a software developer and say &ldquo;I
+won't let you distribute such software.&rdquo;</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>Obviously we live in an imperfect world, and in some cases we run
+into the issue of software patents.  Do you think that we should allow
+privileges for researchers to get around patents in the same way that
+copyright law allows research on copyright material?</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>No, it's a mistake to look for partial solutions, because we have
+a much better chance of establishing a full solution.  Everybody
+involved in software development and distribution and use, except the
+ones in the megacorporations, when they see how dangerous software
+patents are, they will get behind total rejection of software patents.
+Whereas an exception for some special case will only win support from
+the people in that special case.  These partial solutions are
+essentially distractions.  People start by saying, &ldquo;Oh, I'm sure
+we can't really solve the problem, so I give up on that.  Let me
+propose a partial solution.&rdquo; But these partial solutions don't
+make it safe to develop software.</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>You wouldn't, however, oppose a partial solution that's not
+necessarily just directed at software patents, so you wouldn't oppose
+experimental use, which may be a good solution for the pharmaceutical
+patent.</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>I wouldn't oppose that.</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>But what you're saying is that you don't think it's applicable to
+software, just to clarify.</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>Something that saves only a few of us, or only certain activities,
+or gets rid of half the software patents, that's analogous to saying,
+&ldquo;Well, maybe we could clear part of the minefield, or maybe we
+could destroy half the mines in the minefield.&rdquo; [That's an
+improvement] but that doesn't make it safe.</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>So you've been speaking the same thing all around the world.  How
+much uptake has there been?  Have governments changed, or not adopted
+software patents?</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>Some have.  In India a few years ago, there was an attempt to
+change patent law to explicitly allow software patents and it was
+dropped.  A few years ago the US proposed a trade treaty, a free
+exploitation treaty, with Latin America.  And it was blocked by the
+president of Brazil, who said no to software patents and another nasty
+thing relating to computers, and that killed the whole treaty.  That's
+apparently the whole thing that the US wanted to impose on the rest of
+the continent.  But these things don't stay dead; there are companies
+that have full-time staff looking for some way they can subvert some
+country or other.</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>Is there any real hard data around what happens in economic terms
+in the innovation communities in countries that have essentially no
+software patents?</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd><p>There isn't any.  It's almost impossible to measure these
+things.  Actually, I shouldn't say there isn't any.  There is a
+little.  It's very hard to measure the effect of the patent system,
+because you're comparing the real world with a counterfactual world,
+and there's no way to be sure what would happen.</p>
+
+<p>What I can say is before there were software patents, there was
+lots of software development; not as much as there is now, because of
+course there were nowhere near as many computer users.</p>
+
+<p>How many computer users were there in 1982, even in the US?  It was
+a small fraction of the public.  But there were software developers.
+They weren't saying, &ldquo;We desperately want patents.&rdquo;  They
+weren't getting sued for patent infringement after they developed
+their programs.  But there is a bit of [economic] research that I saw
+that apparently software patents resulted not in an increase in
+research, but [in] a shift of funds from research into
+patenting.</p></dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>Do you expect that there would be any interest in trade
+secrets?</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>No.  Before there were software patents, a lot of software
+developers kept the details of their programs secret.  But they
+usually wouldn't keep any of the general ideas secret, because that
+they realized that the big job in developing good software was not
+picking your general ideas, it was implementing a lot of ideas
+together.  So they would publish, [or] they would let their employees
+publish, in scholarly journals any interesting new ideas that they'd
+had.  So now, they'll patent those new ideas.  It has very little to
+do with developing a useful program, and just letting people know some
+ideas doesn't give them a program.  Besides, most of the ideas, the
+thousands of ideas you've combined in your program, are known
+anyway.</dd>
+
+<dt>Q.</dt>
+<dd>To back that up, I was listening to an interview, one of the
+founders of PayPal was interviewed, and he said that he really felt
+strongly that his success was 5 percent idea and 95 percent execution, and that
+supports your point really well.</dd>
+
+<dt>A.</dt>
+<dd>I agree.</dd>
+
+<dt>SF:</dt>
+<dd>Excellent.  Richard has here stickers which I believe are
+free</dd>
+
+<dt>RMS:</dt>
+<dd>Gratis.   And these [other items] are for sale.</dd>
+
+<dt>SF:</dt>
+<dd>So you're welcome to come down.  It's been a great debate&mdash;thank
+you Richard.</dd>
+
+</dl>
+
+<hr class="no-display" />
+<div class="edu-note c"><p id="fsfs">This speech is published in
+<a href="https://shop.fsf.org/product/free-software-free-society/";><cite>Free
+Software, Free Society: The Selected Essays of Richard
+M. Stallman</cite></a>.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer" role="contentinfo">
+<div class="unprintable">
+
+<p>Please send general FSF &amp; GNU inquiries to
+<a href="mailto:gnu@gnu.org";>&lt;gnu@gnu.org&gt;</a>.
+There are also <a href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a>
+the FSF.  Broken links and other corrections or suggestions can be sent
+to <a href="mailto:webmasters@gnu.org";>&lt;webmasters@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
+
+<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
+        replace it with the translation of these two:
+
+        We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
+        translations.  However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
+        Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
+        to <a href="mailto:web-translators@gnu.org";>
+        &lt;web-translators@gnu.org&gt;</a>.</p>
+
+        <p>For information on coordinating and contributing translations of
+        our web pages, see <a
+        href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+        README</a>. -->
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+README</a> for information on coordinating and contributing translations
+of this article.</p>
+</div>
+
+<!-- Regarding copyright, in general, standalone pages (as opposed to
+     files generated as part of manuals) on the GNU web server should
+     be under CC BY-ND 4.0.  Please do NOT change or remove this
+     without talking with the webmasters or licensing team first.
+     Please make sure the copyright date is consistent with the
+     document.  For web pages, it is ok to list just the latest year the
+     document was modified, or published.
+     
+     If you wish to list earlier years, that is ok too.
+     Either "2001, 2002, 2003" or "2001-2003" are ok for specifying
+     years, as long as each year in the range is in fact a copyrightable
+     year, i.e., a year in which the document was published (including
+     being publicly visible on the web or in a revision control system).
+     
+     There is more detail about copyright years in the GNU Maintainers
+     Information document, www.gnu.org/prep/maintain. -->
+
+<p>Copyright &copy; 2009, 2021 Richard Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/";>Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.</p>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p class="unprintable">Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2021/10/29 10:34:13 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div><!-- for class="inner", starts in the banner include -->
+</body>
+</html>
reply via email to
[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]