Re: [Patents] Discussion tomorrow with Eero Bomanson (HELP)

[Erik Josefsson <erikjosefsson@telia.com>]

On Tue, 18 Mar 2003 01:41:12 +0200
"Ville Oksanen" <ville.oksanen@effi.org> wrote:

> A) The change does not really
> matter, because it was already possible to get SW patented as a
> process (the scope of patents didn't get wider but it's now a bit
> easier to get legal remidies)

That it is possible does not mean it is legal. The European Parliament
is asked by the Commission to provide the legal basis for EPO praxis.

You should read the CULT and ITRE reports as well as the FFII
couterproposal:

CULT
http://www.europarl.eu.int/meetdocs/committees/juri/20030219/487019en.pdf
ITRE
http://www.europarl.eu.int/meetdocs/committees/itre/20030219/482104en.pdf
FFII
http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/eubsa-swpat0202/prop/index.en.html

The scope of patents _has_ widend according to patent law
expert and patent judge Lennart Törnroth. It is no longer possible to
strech further "liberalisatoin" of the law. See 

http://www.blipp.com/pawal/prv/20030314/

and the scans of NIR 1999. Conclution is to redefine the invention
consept or go the other way. The dismanteling of the invention consept
is alse described here:

http://swpat.ffii.org/analysis/inflation/index.en.html


Also the national legal basis for extending patentability is described
in sslug hearing paper. It is not proof read by law experts but the
general conclusion that when copyright and patents conflict, basic
rights are threatened. 
http://www.sslug.dk/patent/eudirektiv/sv/sslug02-92sv.html#hrefnot4


> B) The discussion has stuck to technical
> effect, but that's more or less red herring because the other
> criterias are more important.

Indeed it seem that in the real world there is no mesurable
differece between EPO and USPTO praxis. I think Carsten Svaneborg has
data on that. See also economical papers collected here:

http://softwarepatenter.dk/economics_articles.html

> Third argument is typically "Nokia's
> innovations are nowadays based on SW, if Nokia can't patent them,
> Finnish economy will greatly suffer"

I think Nokia, as many other compagnies are highjacked by their legal
deparments.

> Any suggestions how to counter these arguments? The audience is mostly
> IP-lawyers, which means that I'm anyway facing an up-hill battle..
> Also, do you have any questions for Mr Bomanson, I hope that I will be
> able to get some answers out of him.
> 
> Ville Oksanen
> Vice Chairman, Electronic Frontier Finland
> www.EFFI.org
> 
> PS. About the decisions in the Finnish Parliament, the opinion was
> written originally by the Ministry of  Trade and Industry and it
> wasn't changed at all during the process (EFFI had a chance to
> participate, no avail..). The opinion has many serious mistakes, for
> example the opinion claims that it's illegal to make commercial
> products from FOSS..

This is exactly the same "faults" as the Danish Patent Office has put
into public reports. Please contact the board of sslug for more
information.

www.sslug.dk

Good luck!

//Erik