Thread: PostgreSQL and Patents: no position against ?
Hi all, As you may all know already, Patents in Europe have been voted irregularly, in total violation of European Laws, by the European Council (more info : http://wiki.ffii.org/Cons050307En). I'm really surprised PostgreSQL doesn't say clearly we are (most of us I hope), against patents, on the website for example. We just said it, thru PGWN (see http://search.postgresql.org/www.search?ul=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.postgresql.org%2F%25&cs=utf-8&fm=on&st=&gr=on&o=0&ps=20&s=rate&q=patents&submit=Search). I really regret that, I would prefer we say "NO PATENTS" clearly. I know PG is not a political movement, it hasn't to be one. But will we stay and wait the "final headshot", or just stand up and say "we are against patents"? For example, the Samba project is in all points similar to ours. There's no company around, etc. Look on their website (http://www.Samba.org), you'll see the banner I'd like our website to wear too. I hope you'll understand me. Thanks a lot. -- Jean-Paul ARGUDO www.PostgreSQLFr.org OpenPGP : 1024D/93A41CA4
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 14:26:52 +0100, Jean-Paul Argudo <jean-paul@argudo.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > As you may all know already, Patents in Europe have been voted irregularly, in > total violation of European Laws, by the European Council (more info : > http://wiki.ffii.org/Cons050307En). > > I'm really surprised PostgreSQL doesn't say clearly we are (most of us I hope), > against patents, on the website for example. I think there should be a campaing banner or at least a link. As far as I know only patent lawyers really benefit from patents (in case of land of ideas, algorithms, etc). PostgreSQL AFAIK doesn't hold any patents, it is patents that hold PostgreSQL's development (the ARC patent case, "unability" to use patents "freed" by IBM, etc.). In my humble opinion -- we should put the banner or link unless there is any sane reason not to. Regards, Dawid
Dawid Kuroczko m'expliquait (le 10.03.2005 14:38): >On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 14:26:52 +0100, Jean-Paul Argudo <jean-paul@argudo.org> >wrote: > > >>Hi all, >> >>As you may all know already, Patents in Europe have been voted irregularly, in >>total violation of European Laws, by the European Council (more info : >>http://wiki.ffii.org/Cons050307En). >> >>I'm really surprised PostgreSQL doesn't say clearly we are (most of us I hope), >>against patents, on the website for example. >> >> > >I think there should be a campaing banner or at least a link. As far >as I know only patent lawyers really benefit from patents (in case of >land of ideas, algorithms, etc). PostgreSQL AFAIK doesn't hold any >patents, it is patents that hold PostgreSQL's development (the ARC >patent case, "unability" to use patents "freed" by IBM, etc.). > >In my humble opinion -- we should put the banner or link unless there >is any sane reason not to. > > Hi, I don't know if this is politically correct to have some kind of solidarity between Open Source projects. Patents may be a barrier to a lot of the free other projects surroundings PostgreSQL (for which PostgreSQL is a core resource). These projects are making PostgreSQL much attractive to people (depending on their real aim in the use of PostgreSQL). So IMHO we should clearly say what we think about Patents on Software in E.U. . That's a kind of important action, I hope (just like Jean-Paul) you understand us. Cheers, -- Jean-Christophe
jean-paul@argudo.org (Jean-Paul Argudo) wrote: > I know PG is not a political movement, it hasn't to be one. But will > we stay and wait the "final headshot", or just stand up and say "we > are against patents"? There _is_ a problem with doing so, organisationally, as that does make the organisation more or less political in nature. And that can disqualify it from being treated as a charitable organisation. Nothing here prevents individuals from participating in political endeavours, so those that are so interested are free to do so. -- (format nil "~S@~S" "cbbrowne" "gmail.com") http://linuxfinances.info/info/slony.html "It goes against the grain of modern education to teach children to program. What fun is there in making plans, acquiring discipline in organising thoughts, devoting attention to detail and learning to be self-critical?" -- Alan Perlis
Christopher Browne wrote: > Nothing here prevents individuals from participating in political > endeavours, so those that are so interested are free to do so. Yes, I agree -- I'd rather we not have an "official" stance or the like on this issue. -Neil
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, neilc@samurai.com (Neil Conway) wrote: > Christopher Browne wrote: >> Nothing here prevents individuals from participating in political >> endeavours, so those that are so interested are free to do so. > > Yes, I agree -- I'd rather we not have an "official" stance or the > like on this issue. Being a "trans-national" project complicates this somewhat, too. There are two really conspicuous jurisdictions where participation is rather mutually exclusive. - There's the US, where, at some US-centric times, some 'murricans are wont to assume that everyone should write their congresscritter, ignoring that some of us don't have a "Congress." - Then there's Europe, where they occasionally get rather prickly if they think 'murricans are trying to tell them what to do. - On the gripping hand (gratuitous Niven/Pournelle reference :-)), there are folks living in foreign countries who may in effect not have a vote where they are, whether that be Canadians in the US or others Down Under. "Getting political" might well injure one's ability to stay where they are... -- (format nil "~S@~S" "cbbrowne" "gmail.com") http://linuxdatabases.info/info/lisp.html Signs of a Klingon Programmer #3: "By filing this TPR you have challenged the honor of my family. Prepare to die!"
Jean-Paul, We did do this in PWN for that reason. I'm not really sure who else we can reach with the web site. I've also (personally) contacted several PostgreSQL-using companies about providing testimonials to MEPs; given the way the argument has been framed by the Commission, every business that speaks up is worth 100 OSS projects. > There _is_ a problem with doing so, organisationally, as that does > make the organisation more or less political in nature. And that > can disqualify it from being treated as a charitable organisation. This is also a point; we're still waiting on the approval by the IRS for 501 (c)3 status for the PostgreSQL Foundation, overt lobbying on the main web site probably isn't wise. -- Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
Christopher Browne wrote: > There _is_ a problem with doing so, organisationally, as that does > make the organisation more or less political in nature. And that > can disqualify it from being treated as a charitable organisation. I wonder how the FSF and EFF can get away with it then. -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
> There _is_ a problem with doing so, organisationally, as that does > make the organisation more or less political in nature. And that > can disqualify it from being treated as a charitable organisation. Placing a projet as Open Source, IMHO, is already a political act. It means you care about people, and sharing knowledge, etc: let's say is more or less LEFT side politic.... It may means too you care about free commercial relashionships, free open market, etc: let's say is more or less RIGHT side politic... IMHO, everything is political when you are involved in any organization of any nature. How PostgreSQL can tell on the main website " The world's most advanced open source database " ... *and* not defending Open source from its major threat: patents? This seems schyzophrenic to me. Regards, -- Jean-Paul ARGUDO www.PostgreSQLFr.org OpenPGP : 1024D/93A41CA4
Peter, Jean-Paul, > I wonder how the FSF and EFF can get away with it then. Well, I haven't checked on the FSF, but the EFF is *not* a charitable organization for this reason. > Placing a project as Open Source, IMHO, is already a political act. Yep. But it doesn't matter what you or I think is Political; it matters what the US Gov't thinks is political. At least, as far as the 501(c)3 goes. -- Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
Josh Berkus wrote: > Yep. But it doesn't matter what you or I think is Political; it > matters what the US Gov't thinks is political. At least, as far as > the 501(c)3 goes. The PostgreSQL project is not and to my knowledge has no ambitions to become a 501(c)3 organization, so who cares? -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 08:26:49 -0800, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > Peter, Jean-Paul, > > > I wonder how the FSF and EFF can get away with it then. > > Well, I haven't checked on the FSF, but the EFF is *not* a charitable > organization for this reason. From the EFF's donation page: EFF is a 501 (c) (3) charitable organization. Our tax ID number is 04-3091431. Your gift is tax deductible to the full extentprovided by law. To view our financial records, please visit Guidestar. (I needed to check this since I gave them $200 that I am planning on itemizing on my taxes due shortly.)
Peter, > > Yep. But it doesn't matter what you or I think is Political; it > > matters what the US Gov't thinks is political. At least, as far as > > the 501(c)3 goes. > > The PostgreSQL project is not and to my knowledge has no ambitions to > become a 501(c)3 organization, so who cares? Oh, it's not a persuasive argument. It's just a small argument against. I personally have no problem with the idea of having a "No Patents" web button, now that the Europeans among us have put the idea forward. > EFF is a 501 (c) (3) charitable organization. Our tax ID number is > 04-3091431. Your gift is tax deductible to the full extent provided by law. > To view our financial records, please visit Guidestar. That's bizarre. I distinctly remember that my TY letter from the EFF for my gift said that it was *not* charitable due to their political activity. Will have to ask them. -- --Josh Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
On Fri, 2005-03-11 at 17:57 +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Josh Berkus wrote: > > Yep. But it doesn't matter what you or I think is Political; it > > matters what the US Gov't thinks is political. At least, as far as > > the 501(c)3 goes. > > The PostgreSQL project is not and to my knowledge has no ambitions to > become a 501(c)3 organization, so who cares? Because: The PostgreSQL Foundation is a non-profit organization, controlled by its members, established to promote and support PostgreSQL, the world's most advanced and powerful open-source RDBMS (Relational Database Management System). There is a direct correlation. Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake > -- Command Prompt, Inc., Your PostgreSQL solutions company. 503-667-4564 Custom programming, 24x7 support, managed services, and hosting Open Source Authors: plPHP, pgManage, Co-Authors: plPerlNG Reliable replication, Mammoth Replicator - http://www.commandprompt.com/
Christopher Browne wrote: >jean-paul@argudo.org (Jean-Paul Argudo) wrote: > > >>I know PG is not a political movement, it hasn't to be one. But will >>we stay and wait the "final headshot", or just stand up and say "we >>are against patents"? >> >> > >There _is_ a problem with doing so, organisationally, as that does >make the organisation more or less political in nature. And that >can disqualify it from being treated as a charitable organisation. > >Nothing here prevents individuals from participating in political >endeavours, so those that are so interested are free to do so. > > In general I agree. However, I want to point out that the organization exists to promote a project. I think that it is perfectly reasonable to express concern over certain public policy issues if they affect our project. I do agree that we should be careful about it and might want to get some professional guidance before going forward but at least here in the US, it is not uncommon for non-profits (even charitable institutions) to provide information on public policy issues. For example, I would be very surprised if the ICRC were considered anything other than charitable. However, in rare cases, they have expressed concern over public policy issues (for example, when the IDF used ICRC employees as human shields during raids on homes of suspected millitants a couple of years ago). Regardless of what one thinks of the statements, they are worth considering in the context of the current discussion of political v. charitable organizations. Speaking out about the impact of these policies on the operations of the ICRC doesn't undermine their status as far as I can tell. So again, it might be good to get a professional opinion on where the guidelines are. Best Wishes, Chris Travers Metatron Technology Consulting
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > Yep. But it doesn't matter what you or I think is Political; it > matters what the US Gov't thinks is political. At least, as far as > the 501(c)3 goes. I think even if the website and the PGF were the same things (and they clearly are not) I think it's okay to be against certain legislation - the problem is only when you start endorsing one candidate over another, IIRC. >> EFF is a 501 (c) (3) charitable organization. Our tax ID number is >> 04-3091431. Your gift is tax deductible to the full extent provided by law. >> To view our financial records, please visit Guidestar. > That's bizarre. I distinctly remember that my TY letter from the EFF for my > gift said that it was *not* charitable due to their political activity. Will > have to ask them. I have one too, and I don't recall seeing that clause. I'll check mine too :) - -- Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200503121838 http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iD8DBQFCM32dvJuQZxSWSsgRArrdAJ4jOvUSkGPWbnGoxxXWuh8pQVdekgCfX/J0 pilN62olNscTtZEu1AuhX2M= =vaUK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
In an attempt to throw the authorities off his trail, jean-paul@argudo.org (Jean-Paul Argudo) transmitted: > How PostgreSQL can tell on the main website > " The world's most advanced open source database " > > ... *and* not defending Open source from its major threat: patents? > > This seems schyzophrenic to me. It seems perfectly reasonable to me that those are two quite separate matters, only one of which is forcibly relevant to PostgreSQL. I see no problem with people contributing to the EFF as well, or with them choosing to lobby against what may seem to be patent abuse of patents. But I _do_ have a problem with tying such to the PostgreSQL project when it certainly is possible that people may feel differently about the issue. Perhaps the EFF isn't the best organization for dealing with the European situation as it's somewhat US-centric; that's another reason to shy away... I am similarly not enthralled with situations where unions wind up collecting fees from members and then using them to sponsor other political movements. If members are interested, they can participate individually, which rather represents a stronger expression of interest. I have known cases where unions chose to donate to causes that some members distinctly _didn't_ support, and that leads to problems. For the situation to remain "fair," it would also be appropriate for political contributions to only have any sort of "tax deductibility" if given by individuals. Which would rather hamper donations being given in 'corporate' manners, whether by unions or by for-profit corporations. (And possibly one should s/individuals/voters/g ...) For an organization like PGDG that _isn't_ politically activist in nature (and that arguably isn't clearly defined for legal purposes) to steer clear of political activism doesn't seem particularly schizophrenic to me... -- let name="cbbrowne" and tld="cbbrowne.com" in name ^ "@" ^ tld;; http://cbbrowne.com/info/slony.html Microsoft: The Scientology of Computing
Chris, > For an organization like PGDG that _isn't_ politically activist in > nature (and that arguably isn't clearly defined for legal purposes) to > steer clear of political activism doesn't seem particularly > schizophrenic to me... Yes, but it would be hard to argue that anyone in the Postgres project favors software patents. -- Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
Jean-Paul Argudo wrote: >>There _is_ a problem with doing so, organisationally, as that does >>make the organisation more or less political in nature. And that >>can disqualify it from being treated as a charitable organisation. >> >> > >Placing a projet as Open Source, IMHO, is already a political act. > > > >It means you care about people, and sharing knowledge, etc: let's say is more or >less LEFT side politic.... It may means too you care about free commercial >relashionships, free open market, etc: let's say is more or less RIGHT side >politic... > > > Only in the sense that licensing a project under a proprietary license is a political act along the lines of an "Ownership Society." Sorry, I don't think it has a whole lot to do with politics itself. However, the software industry is at the moment highly politicized on both sides for the FOSS divide, particularly over the patent issue. So participation in this community almost by necessity forces one to take a stand. Participation in FOSS for any length of time doubly forces one to take a stand. >IMHO, everything is political when you are involved in any organization of any >nature. > >How PostgreSQL can tell on the main website >" The world's most advanced open source database " > >... *and* not defending Open source from its major threat: patents? > > > Hmm...... I am not entirely convinced that software patents are as dangerous to our project as some have argued. However, helping to turn around the patent question *is* part of ensuring the PostgreSQL gets a fair chance to compete. Otherwise, we have a competitive disadvantage compared to Oracle and MS SQL. So the question is to what extent we are just trying to get a publicity campaign going or whether we are going to really try to strengthen PostgreSQL by looking also at issues of public policy. Obviously we need to be careful going forward. We may want to get professional advice regarding guidelines. But I think that public policy currently needs to be a part of the discussion. Finally, I would point out that the Apache Foundation's new license takes a stand against software patents in the license. This is at least as political as any education campaign. Additionally, I would not be opposed to such a patent clause in the PostgreSQL license. I know it will never happen, but I can still mention it.... Best Wishes, Chris Travers Metatron Technology Consulting
Attachment
Josh Berkus wrote: > Chris, > > > For an organization like PGDG that _isn't_ politically activist in > > nature (and that arguably isn't clearly defined for legal purposes) to > > steer clear of political activism doesn't seem particularly > > schizophrenic to me... > > Yes, but it would be hard to argue that anyone in the Postgres project favors > software patents. I am sure some of our new users _do_ favor software patents, perhaps because they don't yet understand the problems they are causing. Do we want the PostgreSQL web site to be educating them? If we do, we have to educate, not put a banner up there, and if we don't want to educate, we shouldn't put it up there. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 21:58, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Josh Berkus wrote:
> > Chris,
> >
> > > For an organization like PGDG that _isn't_ politically activist in
> > > nature (and that arguably isn't clearly defined for legal purposes) to
> > > steer clear of political activism doesn't seem particularly
> > > schizophrenic to me...
> >
> > Yes, but it would be hard to argue that anyone in the Postgres project favors
> > software patents.
>
> I am sure some of our new users _do_ favor software patents, perhaps
> because they don't yet understand the problems they are causing.
>
> Do we want the PostgreSQL web site to be educating them? If we do, we
> have to educate, not put a banner up there, and if we don't want to
> educate, we shouldn't put it up there.
>
Isn't the point of the banner to link to information where the user
could learn about software patents? Are you arguing that the banner
shouldn't say "software patents bad" but just "learn about software
patents" ?
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
Robert Treat wrote: > On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 21:58, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Josh Berkus wrote: > > > Chris, > > > > > > > For an organization like PGDG that _isn't_ politically activist in > > > > nature (and that arguably isn't clearly defined for legal purposes) to > > > > steer clear of political activism doesn't seem particularly > > > > schizophrenic to me... > > > > > > Yes, but it would be hard to argue that anyone in the Postgres project favors > > > software patents. > > > > I am sure some of our new users _do_ favor software patents, perhaps > > because they don't yet understand the problems they are causing. > > > > Do we want the PostgreSQL web site to be educating them? If we do, we > > have to educate, not put a banner up there, and if we don't want to > > educate, we shouldn't put it up there. > > > > Isn't the point of the banner to link to information where the user > could learn about software patents? Are you arguing that the banner > shouldn't say "software patents bad" but just "learn about software > patents" ? I haven't seen the banner myself so I can't say, but I assumed it was one of those "Patents" with a red line through it or something. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
There _is_ a problem with doing so, organisationally, as that does make the organisation more or less political in nature. And that can disqualify it from being treated as a charitable organisation. Nothing here prevents individuals from participating in political endeavours, so those that are so interested are free to do so. -- (format nil "~S@~S" "cbbrowne" "gmail.com") http://linuxfinances.info/info/slony.html "It goes against the grain of modern education to teach children to program. What fun is there in making plans, acquiring discipline in organising thoughts, devoting attention to detail and learning to be self-critical?" -- Alan Perlis