[Patents] American Inventor Coalition / was Re: Software and

[pelegrin@labri.u-bordeaux.fr (Francois PELLEGRINI)]

kodama@netcourrier.com wrote:
> >From a
> >3d party's point of view, no prior art search can be carried out,
> >because of this variability. No one knows what to search for.
> 
> On the contrarty, it seems easier for the 3rd party: the more the scope is 
> fuzzy, the
> easier it is to find prior art, anticipating the patent.

But such fuzzyness is an impediment to understanding that the said
patent relates to the subject you are currently investigating !
This is the point. The system is useless.

> >What will patent attorneys do with that ?
> They do not care, I suppose. They are tools, not deciders.

You suppose wrong.
It has been surprising how these "tools" ruling at the board of
the EPO were eager to change article 33 so as to get more power.
See the drafts of article 33 at the EPO site (last year's EPO
conference on November)...

> >Sue God for inventing prime numbers ?       8^)
> I am afraid you are infringing lots of anti-SW patents having already
> tried this sort of funny remarks !  ];->

I'm sure not to : we do not wish to patent immaterial processes !   8^)


                                        f.p.