From jean-paul.smets@mines.org  Sun Apr  1 12:00:11 2001
From: jean-paul.smets@mines.org (Jean-Paul Smets)
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 13:00:11 +0200
Subject: [Patents] French State secretary for Industry against SoftPat
In-Reply-To: <B6ECED6F.12A6%pb@breese.fr>
References: <B6ECED6F.12A6%pb@breese.fr>
Message-ID: <01040113001101.00787@jungle>

Le Dimanche  1 Avril 2001 14:36, Pierre Breese a crit :
> le 01/04/2001 07:45, Jean-Paul Smets  jean-paul.smets@mines.org a crit:
> > You probably did not read my email. Could you please read it again.
>
> Dear Jean-Paul,
>
> For sure, you are a brilliant guy, but, please, do not considere that you
> can trap me with such vicious questions.
>
> In both cases, you asked me to give examples of patents filed for not
> patentable inventions !


Not at all. It is not a vicious question. It is a question which is just 
aking you if you can provide examples of innovative software which are not 
patentable under the criteria you provided.

JPS.

>
> Best regards
>
> Pierre BREESE
>
> > take any example from the USPTO base or from software you use everyday.
> > Here is the original mail again.
> >
> > Could you give us an few examples of software which satisfy the following
> > criteria
> >  - new
> >  - sufficient description of the invention.
> >  - no inventiveness in the claimed technical characteristics
> >
> > and a few examples of software which satisfy the following criteria
> >  - new
> >  - sufficient description of the invention.
> >  - no claimed technical characteristics
>
> _______________________________________________
> Patents maillist  -  Patents@liberte.aful.org
> http://liberte.aful.org/mailman/listinfo/patents


