The vast Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system, where Al Essa is Associate Vice Chancellor and Deputy CIO, has more than 0.3 million students. Al's article - Software patents. Why should we care? - in the March/April 2007 Educause Review is worth reading. After a stirring quote from Thomas Jefferson, starts:
"Imagine a world in which Socrates not only originated the dialogue form of inquiry but also filed a patent claiming 'intellectual property' rights for his invention and then vigorously enforced his patent against the Sophists to ensure the 'purity' of his learning method. Imagine an Oxford scholar travelling to the University of Bologna in the thirteenth century, observing the 'lecture' style of teaching, adapting it for use at Oxford, and then filing for patent protection. A cross-licensing agreement permits Bologna faculty to use the lecture format, but Cambridge University faculty are locked out."
Having highlighted what he describes as a gold-rush to "carve out and 'own' the basic building blocks of ideas that enable all educational technology", Al covers, lucidly, the software development process, the way in which (in the US and several other jurisdictions) the ideas behind software have become patentable, and why this is harmful. He concludes with a proposal for a (US-oriented) three-stage solution, that, he contends would "work" in the current context in which the ideas behind software are patentable:
- "Level 1: Basic Disclosure. The company publishes a list and a description of its educationally relevant software patents, both those it currently holds and those it has applied for.
- Level 2: Peer Review. As proposed recently by IBM, the company puts its patent filing on-line for public comment, review, and scrutiny for prior art. The company also allows for a legally non-binding peer review of its education software patent claim by domain experts. The review process could be mediated by an entity such as EDUCAUSE.
- Level 3: Pledge. The company declares that its intention in holding the patent is strictly defensive. It will not file for patent infringement or expect royalties from any party unless it has been threatened by that party."
Al is looking for feedback on his article. You can provide this directly to the Educause Review (where you need an account), or to Al's blog (where you do not).
Comments