BarryODonovan.com

Over in Blacknight’s blog, Paul tells us how they are going to IPv6 the Irish Internet!. Well done lads!.

In Ireland, a lot of the ISPs actually have IPv6 enabled their network edges - this includes imag!ne (aka Gaelic Telecom), HEAnet, BT Ireland, Eircom, Irish Broadband and Smart Telecom. Some of these companies offer IPv6 to their customers but a lot don’t or only on a trial basis.

Why? Well the simple answer is there’s no need. There is just no substantive quantity of content available on IPv6 so ISP customers have no need to have or even know about IPv6. This is why Blacknight’s announcement is so exciting. Paul Kelly, CTO, is setting an ambitious but attainable target of 30,000 Irish websites to be reached over IPv6 by the end of 2008.

Paul also goes on to explain just some of the possible (and serious) consequences if ISPs don’t start making progress towards IPv6-enabling their networks. And his announcement has given me that added impetus to get my finger out.

As members of INEX (Irish Neutral Internet Exchange) Blacknight is the only content provider to date that actively seeks to peer with the other members over IPv6. It would be great if INEX added IPv6 peerings to their peering matrix as a further promotional tool. All the ISPs I mentioned above are also actively peering over IPv6 at INEX.

For anyone who’d like to know more about IPv6, ICANN have posted a factsheet - a clear guide to a technical subject written in plain English - on IPv6 here.

Lastly, to inject a little (geek) humour, at the recent RIPE meeting (RIPE 55), an attendee by the name of Gary Feldman broke up proceedings with a rendition of he’s parody The Day the Routers Died:

Oh, and speaking of content and incentives, *cough* see here *cough*.

We’re just coming to the end of three weeks of a fascinating political election campaign here in Ireland. Fascinating that is if you’re a political anorak. The big election is on Thursday and the two main blocks seem to be neck and neck with a hung Dáil a possibility.

People have asked how I’m voting and the answer is Green. The reactions are often skeptical or surprise. “Green? They won’t win.” They won’t win? Of course they won’t bloody win! Heck, they don’t even have enough candidates to form a Government!

Don’t get me wrong, I’m no a sandle wearing hippy; I voted Fianna Fáil last time (but to be fair - there was no credible opposition at the time). I’m voting Green because:

1. I want Green policies implemented by the next Government: the only way to make that happen is to ensure that enough Green deputies are returned to the Dáil to put them in a position to help form the next Government;
    
2. I don’t want to sound clichéd but I want a change in Government. Whether it’s small social organisations, multi-national companies or Government departments, they all have a leader. In our case, it’s the Taoseich and the Ministers and Junior Ministers that form the Government cabinet.
    
   And just like any walk of life, when the same people steer the ship they become complacent, lethargic and (as we’re seeing more and more) arrogant. That complacency and lethargy seeps through the ranks all the way to the bottom. Waste, mis-management, bad processes and “sticking to the status quo” become common place.
    
   A change of Government will put new Ministers in place. They will be enthusiastic and hands on. They will question the status quo. They will make new demands with new energy and vigor. Yes - it may take them some time to learn their brief in full but it’s at that enthusiastic time that they will question and poke the mandarins and the accepted norm.
    
3. I’m worried about our economic future. Fianna Fáil would like us to believe that they are the only party with the credentials to manage the economy. They forget to mention that it was a labour Minister for Finance that gave us the first budget surplus in the nineties. They remind us that they had nine surpluses in ten years - is a surplus not as much of a mis-management than a deficit?
    
   But it’s not the ability to deliver a realistic budget that worries me - it’s our deadly dependency on petroleum. Did you know that we are dependent on imported fossil fuels for 90% of our energy requirements? Did you know that the cost if a barrel of crude oil has doubled in the lifetime of this Government? Did you know that we, the Irish tax payer, will pay over €500 million for carbon credits between 2008 and 2012? We’re the fourth more dependent country in the world on fossil fuels and our economy couldn’t currently exist without them - a commodity that is volatile, ever-decreasing in availability and ever-increasing in cost - we need to get away from fossil fuels.
    
   Through a variety of measures, the Greens will help reduce our carbon footprint. By reducing our carbon footprint, we reduce our dependency on fossil fuels. These measures include: new building standards which include heat efficiency; promotion (not advertising but through policy and financing) of renewable energy sources; pay as you use tax on car fuel (see below); real investment in public transport both in Dublin and around the country; joined up thinking for urban planning and, most importantly, they have an understanding and enthusiasm for tackling this dependency.
    
   My only concern here is that I’m not doing them justice in the above paragraph. Read their manifesto and energy policy yourselves.
    
4. I’m sick of stupid planning decisions with out thought or regard to schools, public transport and other essential facilities.
    
5. The end of car tax and VRT with the introduction of a pay as you go tax on petrol. This doesn’t seem to have gotten the public debate it deserves but it sounds ingenious to me. Cars cost so much money - both with VRT at the beginning and with tax, maintenance and insurance annually - people feel they have to use them. By reducing the annual cost and taxing on a per-use basis people may start reconsidering the car for some short trips.
    
   You know, I was out walking last night (strolling - not canvassing; I’m not a member of any political party) and the numbers of houses trying to cram three or more cars into their driveways was starking. I was walking in Dublin 16 and 18; places where public transport should be effective but it simply isn’t for a lot of people. Many of these cars were impeding the footpaths and straggling already narrow roads. The owners of these cars are no doubt wasting their lives away sitting in traffic this morning. A lot of these owners are also the children of the home owners who cannot afford to get a home of their own. These are bad legacies of our current Government (they do have good legacies too; I’m not blinkered). Hopefully with the Green’s combined policies and a role in Government, this situation will help reverse itself.
    
6. Here’s a great one from their manifesto: carry out a feasibility study into the State re-taking control of Eircom, divesting any commercial operation, and maintaining the fixed line network as an open access infrastructure to all operators. As someone who has worked in the telecommunications sector for an OLO (Other Licensed Operator), I see first hand the disastrous decision it was to sell off Eircom. Think about the assets and infrastructure - at a minimum you have a copper pair into every premise in Ireland that has been built up over more than a hundred years. And we now have a commercial organisation more interested in their profits that the countries badly needed broadband infrastructure for the growth of our “knowledge economy”. Green Party, I hope you find a way to CPO their asses!
    
   By the way - if any member of Government defends that decision remind them that they are now trying to do it the correct way with the ESB: sell off the retail arm but retain control of the infrastructure and assets. Once bitten, twice shy? Or have they simply learnt from their disastrous mistake.
    
7. Just to finish up, there is one more policy that I think is long overdue: no more corporate donations to political parties. For a modern, honest and impartisan Government, this is a policy that is long overdue. I am a strong democratic. I believe in politics and I’m not apathetic or ignorant to the very very hard work that politicians do. I believe the political parties should be 100% funded by the public exchequer. Then they’ll really work for us free of outside influences.

By voting Green you will help ensure that have a mandate sufficient to put them in a coalition Government and the stronger the mandate they receive, the greater their negotiating position for their policies.

Voting Green doesn’t get you a Green Government, but it does get you some Green policy implemented in Government. If we can even get some of the above implemented, I believe we’ll all be better off.

Now, the obligitory party political broadcast. The theme is clear:

Topical and quiet funny:

Also good - Bush at his best:

and where it all comes from:

The software patents issue is coming to a head and with this in mind I thought it was time to back up one of the main arguments with some figures from the European Patent Office (EPO).

The argument being that large international companies have been prospecting for the past few years through the EPO by taking out patents on business methods and algorithms in anticipation of EU Directive COD/2002/0047 coming into law. The purpose of this directive is to “harmonise and unify” the patentability criteria of Europe’s patent offices and give effect to the EPO. Unfortunately this directive, as it stands, contains loopholes which would make all business methods and software ideas legally patentable.

Our argument is that if this directive is passed it will stifle innovation and competition. These large companies will have an enormous advantage over their smaller competitors through their amassed patents. The threat of patent litigation alone will dissuade SMEs from innovating. It should also be known that the big U.S. and Japanese I.T. companies have formed cartel-like patent sharing agreements of which the E.U.’s SMEs cannot afford to join.

I have been asked to back these assertions up with figures by a number of journalists. The EPO publishes annual reports so let’s look at the statistics from 2002 and 2003. There is no one category that says “Software Algorithms” or “Business Methods”. There is, however, category G06 - “Computing; Calculating; Counting” which contains many sub-categories including “Eectrical digital data processing”, “Recognition of data; Presentation of data; Record carriers; Handling record carriers”, etc. The number of patents issued/filed for Ireland, Great Britain, Japan and the US in these years and in this category were:

Patents found in this category include many of those listed on http://webshop.ffii.org/ including #1 on the list: “a method of ordering services, like booking hotel rooms” [over the Internet] (EP0738446) and a “network-based sales system includes at least one buyer computer for operation by a user desiring to buy a product, at least one merchant computer, and at least one payment computer” (EP0803105).

I think these figures speak for themselves.

One last thing. A common argument made is that if this directive does not pass then U.S. companies will not invest in R&D programs in the E.U. Well let me ask, what the hell have they been doing here for the past twenty years? If the directive does not pass, the status quo is maintained. Microsoft, IBM, Sun, etc will continue their existing and new R&D programs here in Ireland and throughout the E.U. Just as they always have.

I was reading a blog post about some bad publicity for Bairbre de Brun and her attendance record in the EU Parliament. That post linked this site which also lists the attendance levels of the Irish contingent.

Although the attendance levels seem high, we could be represented a lot better. Ireland ranks only 19th of the 25 countries.

I wonder if a website exists for the Dail’s attendance levels?

I got CC’d a reply to an e-mail from Ms Kathy Sinnott MEP today which asserts her strong opposition to EU Directive COD/2002/0047 which includes the issue of software patentability. Even in one small paragraph she shows a good understanding of the issue and I am delighted that such a hard working and articulate MEP is on board.

In her own words:

I am most certainly not [undecided on this issue]. In response to your concerns about software patentability, I would like to reassure you that I am wholeheartedly opposed to this legislation. It will stifle innovation and prevent SME’s and individuals from having the chance to compete equally with the Microsoft’s of this world. You may rest assured that we will be fighting this directive (again).

As it currently stands, we now have eight of our sixteen (inc. Northern Ireland) MEPs committed to opposing^* software patentability with five yet to inform us of their position and three taking the matter under consideration. Optimistically, the final count could be as good as twelve or thirteen opposing this.

The next big task will be to ensure that all those opposing software patentability will actually turn up in parliament as an absolute majority will be required to defeat or amend the directive; this essentially means that any MEP who does not show up in parliament to vote will be effectively casting their vote in favour of the directive. What a wonderful democracy we have.

More information on the Irish campaign can be found at KDE.ie and at the Irish Free Software Organisation. The current status of the sixteen Irish MEPs is also available at KDE.ie and with more detail here.

^* by oppose I refer to an MEP being against the patentability of software ideas and business methods; this does not reflect whether an MEP is against the directive itself or would prefer to see it amended.

Following my blog entry on ratemyteachers.ie dated May 17, I was informed of a number of issues surrounding defamation law and the Internet by a friend of mine (who is a lawyer - I am not).

He backed up the assertion made by Fergal Crehan, Barrister-at-Law, in his article that a student acting as a moderator for a school listed on ratemyteachers.ie could have a legal action taken against him/her as an editor in a defamation case. I would reiterate here that as much as these moderators may feel that they remain anonymous there is in fact a trail that can almost always be followed to identify them. The alleged defamed person or an agent acting on their behalf can apply to the courts for such information to be made available by ISPs (Internet Service Providers).

It was also pointed out to me that hosting providers (i.e. companies that provide the necessary services to put websites such as ratemyteachers.ie on the Internet) can also become liable in a defamation case once they have been notified that content that they are hosting is or could be construed as being libel. A good example of how an ISP could become liable is the case of Godfrey v Demon Internet Ltd (the commentary may actually be more interesting).

As I mentioned in my first post, ratemyteachers.ie is hosted by Rackspace Ltd in the United States. However, they also have a British office and this arm of the company may be forced to take action as it is in the E.U. Aggrieved teachers should certainly consider mailing the British office by registered mail (always more effective than an e-mail) quoting Godfrey v Demon Internet Ltd at: Rackspace Managed Hosting, 8 The Square, Stockley Park, Uxbridge, UB11 1BA, England. And let me know how you get on.

There are now only 48 days left before EU Directive COD/2002/0047 which incorporates software patentability gets its second reading in the European Parliament. KDE.ie is keeping a record of how our MEPs are planning to vote at http://www.kde.ie/patents/mep-status.php and Ciarán O’Riordan has duplicated that list with references on the IFSO’s wiki at http://www.ifso.ie/cgi-bin/wiki.cgi/SwpatMepPositions - it’s time anyone who has yet to e-mail their local MEPs got off their arse and did it.

If they are voting against sotware patentability, thank them for their support. If they are voting in favour of software patentability then politely exppress your concerns and implore them to reconsider. If they are undecided then also exppress your concerns and ask them to apprise you (and pass that information onto me also please) of their eventual decision.

The reason that I emphasise local MEP is that your MEPs are required to answer all correspondence that they receive.

Justin Mason published an excellent quote on his weblog ( http://taint.org/ ) which I think is worthy of repetition here:

Mr. Justice Bradley, discussing US patent law in 1882:

The design of the patent laws is to reward those who make some substantial discovery or invention, which adds to our knowledge and makes a step in advance in the useful arts. Such inventors are worthy of all favour. It was never the object of those laws to grant a monopoly for every trifling device, every shadow of a shade of an idea, which would naturally and spontaneously occur to any skilled mechanic or operator in the ordinary progress of manufactures.

Such an indiscriminate creation of exclusive privileges tends rather to obstruct than to stimulate invention. It creates a class of speculative schemers who make it their business to watch the advancing wave of improvement, and gather its foam in the form of patented monopolies, which enable them to lay a heavy tax upon the industry of the country, without contributing anything to the real advancement of the arts. It embarrasses the honest pursuit of business with fears and apprehensions of concealed liens and unknown liabilities to lawsuits and vexatious accountings for profits made in good faith.