[Patents] consultation questions

[phm@a2e.de (PILCH Hartmut)]

Gepicaam, a frequently used double of P. Breese, quoted:

> le 08/05/2001 00:27, PILCH Hartmut =E0 phm@a2e.de a =E9crit=A0:
>
> >> I do not find it surprising that the French government is (pretending)
> >> to argue otherwise, i.e., support restricting the patenting of
> >> software.  France is a lousy place for SMEs, at least by all of the
> >
> > I doubt Greg knows enough about France.
>
> France is not a "lousy place" for SMEs, but of course French SMEs have to
> put up with more handicaps as US SMEs (native market size, language, tax
> system). But this handicaps are overcome by a lot of dynamics companies.
>
> French government takes an ambiguous stand on software patent matter, and=
 I
> hope a coming clarification :
> on the one hand, Industry Minister Christian PIERRET seems sincerely
> convinced that innovation has to be encouraged and that SMEs needs a bett=
er
> sensitization on patent matter (he regularly insists on the importance of
> patents system),

This is in line with his stance against software patents:  on the one hand
excessive expansion of the patent system has to be cut back, on the other
SMEs have to be aware of the possibilities that the real existing (and
hopefully healthy) patent system offers to them.

> on the other hand, some member of Industry's Department
> (DIGITIP for example) and some congressmen's seems contaminated by
> "abolitionist lobbying", especially via the influential "corps des Mines"=
=2E

Some parliamentarians seem to have started to recognize that there
is no sound economic rationale for software patents and that the movement
that pushes patent inflation is not acting in the public interest.

> Amid, the prime Minister Lionel JOSPIN recently wrote that "patent has to=
 be
> granted only for patentable inventions" ! Of course, such a consensual
> affirmation will satisfy everyone, but will not help the legibility and
> clarification of French official stance...
> In private, some people of M. PIERRET's retinue explained that "French
> technology lag behind international competition, and that trying to weake=
n
> patent protection will be more favorable for French companies as for fore=
ign
> companies".

This could be an attempt at libel, trying to link the anti-swpat stance to
national protectionism and create pretexts for a TRIPS charge.

> I admit that this standpoint is not senseless. But, personally, I
> would prefer that government encourage French became more competitive,
> and I'm quite optimistic of the capacity of French SMEs to take part
> in the international competition.

In order to encourage competitiveness it is important to cut down redtape
and patent bureaucracy.  Deciding against software patents is a necessary
milestone toward building a robust and competitive European economy.  If
the EU wants to "win the hearts and minds of the Europeans", it must show
its capability of stopping technological and economic nonsense such as
software patents.

> > Of course, if you are hostile to SMEs (like established companies and
> > some European governments), than trying to weaken patent protection
> > and ignoring the goal of improving patent quality is the position to
> > take.  Being (or trying to be) an SME, I take, and have taken, the
> > exact opposite position.  And hopefully someday I will come up with
> > an idea viable enough to attract venture capital investment, and will
> > damn well want to be able to patent it, even if it is software.
>
> I assent to this remark.

This was not my remark but Greg's, diametrically opposed to what I think.
You misquoted.
It represents the standard of fairness that we know well from you and,
unfortunately, most pro-patent advocates on this list.

> > So as European governments better understand the economics of attractin=
g
> > investments for their native SMEs, especially their software SMEs, I
> > suspect they will be more supportive of an open, software patenting
> > policy.
>
> As European governments start reading the teachings of a certain
> Californian co-design cosmology guru and proprietor of all rigorous
> scientific definitions, they may well reach a stage of enlightenment at
> which they will suddenly realise that software patenting stands for
> "openness" and that the best way to solve Europe's problems is to go to
> California and beg for a license to implement some of the innovative
> policies which this guru owns, thanks to an explosion of creativity
> financed by patent-hungry venture capitalists.
>
>
> The more important mechanisms for protecting investments are
>
>     product complexity
>     business secret
>     marketing
>     complementary products
>     complementary services
>     customer relations
>
> or similar, I may have to check the details again.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Patents maillist  -  Patents@liberte.aful.org
> http://liberte.aful.org/mailman/listinfo/patents
>