[A2k] Proposals for the section of the Paris Accord on Software

Sat Jun 10 10:49:01 2006

Le Dimanche 4 Juin 2006 09:55, James Love a =E9crit :
> This is just to get the discussion on software started....jl
I have tried to work a bit on your initial software part. I suggest to bett=
er
take in account some specifics of software. Software is pure information,
software is information about processing information (that is intrinsically
meta-information), software commons are the predecessor, the mature example=
,
and a major enabler for all other information commons.

To take this in account, I would volunteer as the key statement
(a kind of foundation for the others) :

0- For any software functionality that is essential to creative, expressive=
,
knowledge and innovation activities in today's or tomorrow's information
society, there should exists, as soon as possible, at least one practical
solution that is implemented as FLOSS (free/libre/open source software), an=
d
whose usage does not depend on proprietary software.

The legal (11), standards and interoperability (3, 9, 10), competition (1, =
2,
6) and other points in your list can be derived from this prerequisite. Mos=
t
can not be credibly ensured without (0) being fulfilled.

Some other points also follow, that maybe deserve mention, such as the
legitimacy for governements or other parties to support the creation of
missing components, either directly (German policy) or indirectly (research
and development policy, other forms of incentives, pro-active competition
policy with corrective measures based on irrevocable royalty-free non-IP
constrained licenses).

Finally, I don't agree with the present drafting of 5. I am not in favour o=
f
infringing software copyright. In many cases, free software is the obvious
solution to avoid infringing on proprietary software copyright. However,
there is strictly no evidence that infringement of software copyrights by
(whom? missing word in your draft) has "deterred firms from employing
programmers to develop new products". In contrast, there is strong evidence
that monopoly positions of installed software providers (created including =
by
letting "illegal" copying develop to lock in users) acts as an innovation
deterrent within these companies, inducing a predominantly rent-seeking
behaviour and the search for innnovation that protects oligopolistic busine=
ss
models (DRMs for instance) instead of providing new useful functionality to
users. Patent and other legal or regulatory developments that provide
dominant players with weapons of massive deterrence or destruction of cours=
e
reinforce this trend (as shown be Bessen, Maskin and Hunt).

Best regards,

Philippe

> ----------
> Proposals for the section of the Paris Accord on Software
>
> 1. Concentration of ownership and control of software operating
> systems and applications presents risks and dangers to programmers
> and users.
>
> 2.  Microsoft's monopoly in terms of PC operating systems and office
> productivity applications harms users and programmers, and must be
> addressed by governments, programmers and purchasers of software.
>
> 3.  Programmers of software need access to certain interface data, in
> order to design products that work with other products.
>
> 4.  Some high quality software products, standards, and protocols,
> can and will be produced without regard to ownership or control of
> software code, or any expectation of remuneration or other pecuniary
> reward from the sale or licensing of the code.   Other important
> software products, standards and protocols are unlikely to be
> produced without an expectation of economic rewards from the sale or
> licensing of the code.
>
> 5.  Consumers agree that infringement of software applications by
> undermines economic incentives for firms to employ programmers to
> develop new products.  Programmers agree that excessive prices for
> software programs contribute to infringement of software copyrights.
>
> 6.  Commercial software products should not be designed to lock-in
> users to particular vendors.
>
> 7.  Business models for software development should reward
> programmers for making users better off, and not reward programmers
> or software publishers for anticompetitive and anti-consumer practices.
>
> 8.  Open document formats are essential for the development of a
> competitive and open software industry.
>
> 9.  Users and programmers should lobby large buyers of software to
> demand open document formats, and other measures that promote
> interoperability.
>
> 10.  Proprietary technologies that undermine the World Wide Web
> should be discouraged.
>
> 11.  Experience has shown that the costs of extending patent
> protection to software exceed the benefits.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> James Love, CPTech / www.cptech.org / mailto:james.love@cptech.org /
> tel. +1.202.332.2670 / mobile +1.202.361.3040
>
> "If everyone thinks the same: No one thinks."  Bill Walton
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> A2k mailing list
> A2k@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------=
--
>------------ Orange vous informe que cet  e-mail a ete controle par
> l'anti-virus mail. Aucun virus connu a ce jour par nos services n'a ete
> detecte.

--
Philippe Aigrain
(message personnel)