Re: [Patents] myths & lies

[Gregory Aharonian <srctran@world.std.com>]

>All of the points you now make in the fight against SW patents in
>Europe, were aired with great credence before State Street in America.

The points had little credence in America, which is why the American
courts rejected them and repeatedly confirmed the patentability of
software in many decisions before State Street (such as Alappat,
which is cited by State Street).  The courts did this partly because
the courts could never make any sense of applying copyright to software,
especially the source code.  Given the comparable quality of analysis
of the American and European courts, I suspect the European courts will
eventually converge to the same position (assuming the politicians don't
interfere).

>The "confirmation of the status quo" regarding business method patents
>was stunning, because it cut to the core of a lot of people's beliefs
>about how far exclusive rights could be upheld.

The State Street decision was "stunning" only if you weren't paying much
attention to the court decisions of the past.  Business method patents
had been around for a long time, though you always had to jump through
a few hoops at the PTO to get them issued.  State Street just removed
the hoops.  With regards to exclusive rights, I would guess more people
in America are upset over the copyright extension acts, which keep on
extending the exclusive rights for far too many years in the minds of
many people.

Seth, you might want to consider moving to America so you can be close to
a legal library to do some research on these issues.  European libraries
tend to focus more on European law.

Greg Aharonian