If Nokia wants to use software patents aggressively, and lobby governments to strengthen them, that is their right under the present law, and likewise if people want to boycott pro-software-patent companies we have a right to do so. The horrible thing here is the dishonesty, eg trying to convince your readers that Nokia is not one of the companies that should be boycotted by people who are anti-software-patent, while Nokia is actually still lobbying this way.

Such deception is really shameful imo, and barring some credible news that Nokia has actually changed and is now lobbying *against* software patents, I’d say that an apology is warranted here.

What really matters is, if they still do active lobbying in Brussels for software patents. And for my part even doing nothing seems to be a sign that Nokia is indeed still not opposed to software patents. At least if you look, what Nokia stand for (in the past) you will get this impression.

And I can see no official sign that their politics regarding this matter has changed.

It would be really interesting if you could get an official statement what Nokias official policy is. This would end speculation in either direction. And if Nokia officially opposes to software patents now, the FFII will definitely update their pages - might even grant them some place on their homepage for such groundbreaking news.

Please bare with me if I won’t go now through all these points. It is clear from the feedback received in the last hours that at the end what you expect is not only _digging_ but an official statement covering the whole topic. This will take some work and time, but at least now you know that web are working on this.

Just one comment about the preventive/aggressive thing. I get your point and I could have found better words. Personally, your comments made me think that, like defence/attack or yin/yang or black/white both concepts are hardly never fully dissociated but contain some of each other. It is also difficult to calculate percentages of prevention/aggression to show that i.e. Player A is 75% aggressive while Player B is only 25% aggressive but… there are indeed some companies that are more aggressive than preventive in this field, while others are more preventive than aggressive. I guess this is the point I was trying to make, not well explained enough.

> EICTA will continue to make the case throughout Europe for the
> contribution that CII patents make to research, innovation and to
> overall European competitiveness

As a personal opinion I’d call them fairly aggressive in their lobbying (not that I’m an expert in that).

Anyway, I’d say the ball is in Nokia side of the court: Nokia has a clear and fairly recent history of actively supporting software patents in Europe. Is there any reason I should assume this has changed? Saying “our sw patents are 100% defensive” and at the same time pushing for more patentability through EICTA does not make sense…

http://www.eicta.org
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_on_the_patentability_of_computer-implemented_inventions#Supporters_of_the_proposal
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2005/07/68099

Nokia has to get patents where patents are granted on ideas and information. Lacking a clear indication otherwise, we must assume that Nokia supports its own actions and approves of software patents.

It is folly to believe that we can know the attitude and actions of future Nokia employees, and therefor characterize their patent use as preventive and aggressive.

I love my Nokia phone, but it creates no halo effect for the company.

As for the “everyone else is doing it so we must too” argument, Nokia could simply file the patent and then donate it to an organization like the FSF that would “destroy” it (commit to never using it).