From phm@a2e.de  Thu May  3 12:18:09 2001
From: phm@a2e.de (PILCH Hartmut)
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 13:18:09 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [Patents] Re: Keen wins patent for phone-advice system
In-Reply-To: <20010503121340.A41807@math.jussieu.fr>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0105031301440.23845-100000@mulix.oas.a2e.de>

SF quoted:

> http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1007-200-5729404.html

> "The patent, which Keen applied for originally in March 1999, covers
> the company's method of connecting consumers and experts and the
> database system it uses to make those connections.  The patent also
> covers the computer code needed to connect advice givers and experts."

Sorry, this says nothing.  We should at least be told where the patent was
granted and what the main claim is.  Was it granted in the US?

It is bad practise of the news media nowadays to keep silent on these
things.

Keen's patent British Patent Application GB2355558 reads:

What is claimed is:

1. A method of connecting two parties in real time, the method comprising:
  providing a list of information providers, the list including an
  indication of a current availability status and a price for each
  information provider; and,
  in response to a user selecting an information provider from the list,
  establishing a real time voice communication connection between the
  information provider and the user.

2 the method as described in claim 1, wherein ...
3 the method as described in claim 1, wherein ...
4 the method as described in claim 1, wherein ...
5 the method as described in claim 1, wherein ...
6 the method as described in claim 1, wherein ...
7 the method as described in claim 1, wherein ...
8 the method as described in claim 1, wherein the real time connection
  includes a telephone connection.

According to current USPTO and EPO doctrine

	http://swpat.ffii.org/vreji/papri/jwip-schar98/

this kind of patent claim is permissible.  However the EPO still carries
with it some rests of the old "new teaching concerning causality of
natural forces" doctrine, zigzagging back and forth between that and the
new "all practical and repeatable solutions" rule, according to current
political needs.  This zigzag approach is to be codified into an EU
directive, so as to provide "legal security", i.e. invest the EPO (or a
to-be-created central European court in Luxemburg) with the power to
interpret the law according to the patent movement's day-to-day political
needs, and oblige other courts to follow this zigzag course as closely as
they can.

Not a bad idea, as it gives us the opportunity to stir up a lot of
trouble, no matter how they decide.  Eventually, as more and more people
are sucked into the internet, this may let the patent movement lose all of
its credibility.

-phm








