selectparks - Patenting Play in the European Parliament.

In just 4 days Members of the European Parliament will vote on ammendments to a controversial directive that will have big implications on the kinds of games made here in Europe.
In 2002 the European Commission proposed a radical directive that would legalise US-style unlimited patentability of software in the EU. Up until this time computer programs were seen as unpatentable, and for good reason; recent years have seen a slew of absurd yet destructive patents in the US, the breaching of which have resulted in multi-million dollar legal battles. Now, here in the EU, in anticipation of this directive being passed, the EPO is getting it's fair share of US style patents. Software Patents have been granted for the 'invention' of the progress bar, browsing on a mobile device and other overtly obvious things.
An 'inventor' does not need to actually write the software as example of 'prior art', they simply need to have dated documentation that proves they were the first to conceive of the given system. This, in itself, reveals it's not software that's being patented, so much as ideas themselves.
Still, many wonder why such absurd patents are granted by patent offices. Put simply, patent offices are paper pushing businesses, it is in their interest to ensure widest possible patentability. Software patents however are perhaps the most dangerous kind; as soon as software is patentable, anything is patentable, including game designs themselves. In the US this is already well underway..

More below..

A computer program is a collection of methods and ideas - any programmer knows that. A software program is 'read' by the computer as a set of instructions, many of which are conditional to given input and thus inform new directions in this reading process. There are many different ways to express the same programming concept (some more ingenious than others) but nearly all are derivative of, or build upon previous work. This is how software development as a practice continues to improve and innovate. Just like a pop song, there are many different ways to write one, yet each can still draw from a similar structure (the 'Rondo' phrasal Form: phrase A, B, A, C, A has persisted in Pop music since the 60's). In fact there is arguably little difference between software and literature or music altogether, both of which have been served well by copyright since around 1710. As the former French Prime Minister and current Rapporteur put's it.

"Software is in fact the combination in an original work of one or more algorithms, that is to say, a set of mathematical formulae. As Albert Einstein has said, a mathematical formula is not patentable. It is by nature an idea, like a book, a set of words, or a chord in music."

So it follows that because a game design (or at least it's internal logic) can be described algorithmically, it is therefore patentable. Recently in the US, software patents that relate directly to game design and game logics have started to surface. Given you have 'prior art' and enough money, you are granted legal monopoly over your 'invention'. Here's one such example, a scoring method and system for determining points in a game.

Major players in the entertainment industry want this breadth of patentability badly. Given that there are very few significant game development teams here in the EU, American monopolists like Electronic Arts and Microsoft need this directive to ensure they continue to have the largest stake the European market. Put simply, the last thing US developers want is innovation in the EU.
Right now at the European Parliament, some 40 U.S lobbyists (and their EU insiders) representing coprporate interest are working hard to push MEP's toward approving this destructive directive.

Research shows that patents are rarely ever used to protect 'innovations'. Generally patents are used to discourage creation of a superior product that will put an existing, inferior product out of market; method: if your existing product is about to be superceded, patent ideas for possible superceding products. Because registering and defending software patents is expensive, they are not very popular amongst small to medium sized enterprised (SME's, indie teams). This research shows only 20% of all european software patents are owned by SME's, and only 10% of those by european SME's.

Software patents are also often written to cover as wide as possible description to directly encourage the possibility of a patent breach by 'competition', which in turn is sometimes done as part of aggressive takeover agendas; given that it costs a minimum of US$400,000 the moment you put your foot in the door of court, patent cases are often settled with IP exchanges - larger companies use this technique to buy out smaller companies. For these reasons software patents are used precisely to the ends of killing innovation so existing monopolies can be maintained, or simply to make alot of money fast. Finally, software patents discourage innovation on a cultural level. While it costs alot to register a patent, it often costs many times more to research possible patent breaches before the task of writing software or making a game even begins. Coding without stepping on someone's expensive toes is increasingly difficult these days.

Ever wondered where all the little guys went?

Around 380,000 software developers and 3000 CEO's of software companies here in the EU have registered their stance against unlimited patentability of software. EU Game developers however are a little left in the dark as to the direct dangers facing European innovation in the feild. Independent game developers in the EU should contact their MEP immediately to ask them to support the vote for these ammendments to the directive to ensure that software will remain unpatentable. The vote is on Wednesday (06.07.05) and a minimum of 367 of the 732 MEP's must be present and vote for these amendments. Email addresses of MEP's can be found here.

It's these kinds of patents no game developer wants to see legalised in the EU:

Strafing and Panning in a game.
Making Music in games
Network participation type game system..
Card Game for Learning
Ergonomic Gaming Machine
The bonus level(?)
Apparatus and method for a gaming tournament network.
Camera recognition of player prior to game play
Vibrating Joystick
Haptic devices for games

References:

No software patents
Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure
The Economic Majority
Richard Stallman on swpats for the Guardian