-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
The EPO's Reductio ad Absurdum
,----[ Quote ]
| Court decisions on whether software patents are permissible within Europe
| have see-sawed wildly, with some decisions in favour being counterbalanced by
| others that confirm that software cannot be patented “as such”.
| Unfortunately, those meaningless weasel words “as such” have provided a tiny
| opening for proponents of software patents – typically large companies that
| want to use intellectual monopolies to stifle competition, and software
| patent lawyers who want more lucrative business – that the latter are
| constantly trying to widen.
|
| [...]
|
| One trick that has been tried by software patent lawyers is to define
| something called a “computer-implemented invention”, which is basically a
| repackaging of software to include a technical effect in order to be
| patentable.
`----
http://www.computerworlduk.com/community/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=1437&blogid=14
European software patent referral receives welcome
,----[ Quote ]
| In an interview at the beginning of this year, shortly after she took over
| the top job in Munich, Brimelow said she wasn't ready to refer the software
| patents question to the EBoA, perhaps out of respect for her predecessor.
|
| Now that she is ready, the reaction has been positive.
|
| "It will be a landmark case with a sizeable effect on the interpretation of
| patent law even beyond Europe," said Thomas Vinje, an intellectual property
| expert and partner at the law firm Clifford Chance.
|
| Pieter Hintjens, a prominent campaigner against software patents during the
| political debate in 2005 and founder of software company Imatix, welcomed
| Brimelow's decision.
|
| "The (EPO) has resisted doing this for many years. In the past it didn't want
| to clamp down on software patent applications for economic reasons: The EPO
| makes money from patent applications and renewals. Brimelow at last is taking
| a healthier approach, prioritizing the long-term interests of society ahead
| of the short-term financial ones," Hintjens said.
`----
http://www.nytimes.com/external/idg/2008/10/27/27idg-European-softwa.html
,----[ Quote ]
| The thorny issue of software patents in the EU was again in the news last
| week. Regular readers will recall the ongoing row between the UK Intellectual
| Property Office (UK IPO) and the courts over the former's application of both
| UK and EU case law on the extent to which computer software can be patented.
| The most recent round a couple of weeks back saw the Court of Appeal find the
| UK IPO was wrong to deny a patent to Symbian's PC performance enhancing
| software. Now the European Patent Office (EPO) has sought clarification by
| way of a reference to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (which hears appeals
| against EPO decisions) seeking to clear up some of the finer points of the
| application of European patent law. Those clever kitties at the IP Kat reckon
| the referral should end some of the uncertainty over computer software at the
| EPO level and (indirectly) aid the UK IPO as well. Let's hope so.
`----
http://www.own-it.org/news/article/?p=15&a=1826&t=
Recent:
EPO Board to establish software patents?
,----[ Quote ]
| In fact, the questions seem like a school book example of avoiding
| clarifications by asking the wrong questions. Are the EPO just cowards,
| creating straw men or obstructing the clarity of law?
`----
http://bosson.blogspot.com/2008/10/epo-board-to-establish-software-patents.html
,----[ Quote ]
| Staff at the European Patent Office went on strike accusing the organization
| of corruption: specifically, stretching the standards for patents in order to
| make more money.
|
| One of the ways that the EPO has done this is by issuing software patents in
| defiance of the treaty that set it up.
`----
http://www.stallman.org/archives/2008-jul-oct.html#24%20September%202008%20%28Patent%20Office%20on%20Strike%29
European Patent Agents Go On Strike To Complain About Pressure To Approve Bad
Patents
,----[ Quote ]
| One of the causes of so many bad patents getting approved lately is screwed
| up incentives in the patent system. For a while, the US had a de facto system
| where agents were pushed to approve a patent when in doubt. That's because
| they were judged on how many patents they went through -- and if they
| rejected a patent, the applicant could complain and ask for a review --
| meaning that the examiner would have to spend more time reviewing that same
| patent again, decreasing the number of patents they had gotten through,
| potentially harming their "stats." Thus, it's often easier to just "approve."
| And, of course, the Patent Office itself is usually fine with this, because
| that means more patent applications and more fees.
`----
http://techdirt.com/articles/20080923/1804402351.shtml
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkkIIL8ACgkQU4xAY3RXLo6JVgCeOddeQmcZXu0aw9GaGbys7Bz0
4B0An2W/WVrdBnKS/h0Z0ChEUghkAikD
=MbzU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
