Re: [Patents] EPO 1984/1990: correct interpretation of Art 52 EPC

[Erik Josefsson <erikjosefsson@telia.com>]

On Tue, 1 Apr 2003 10:54:57 -0500 (EST)
Gregory Aharonian <srctran@world.std.com> wrote:

> >This time, in 1990, the Board of Appeals evades the question of what
> >"programs for computer" are in the EPC context and instead rejects
> >the appeal by arguing indirectly that the use of general-purpose
> >computer hardware does not confer technicity on an abstract method:
> 
> Which renders this 1990 EPO Board decision as meaningless as the EPO's
> 2000 Pension Patent decision where the EPO Board confesses that it has
> no definition of "technical".

I can't find that confession. Can you please quote?

> This lack of linguistic precision is unacceptable,

I don't think "linguistic precision" is the problem. The problem is that
EPC 52.2 can not be violated to satisfy EPO customers needs without
linguistic effort.

> when if the EPO Board consulted with any European
> linguists, mathematicians and philosophers of science, they would be
> exposed to definitions of "technical" that provide more objective
> ways of testing to see if something is "technical"

While they are at it, EPO should also ask the cross scientific reference
group you suggest to evaluate if the patent system is beneficial and if
the "technicity"-requirement [1] limits the system in a forseeable way.

It seems to me you are supporting point 7 of Call for action:
http://swpat.ffii.org/papers/eubsa-swpat0202/demands/index.en.html#solv

> (ways computer programs easily satisfy) then this continual
> hand-waving by the EPO Board.

Well, I disagree (except for hand-waving) :-)

To sort things out, could you perhaps give examples of what you consider
non-technical unpatentable inventions? Perhaps some linguistic precision
would help us understand each other better.

Contributions to the test suite is also welcome:
http://swpat.ffii.org/analysis/testsuite/index.en.html

//Erik

[1] soon to be abandoned due to US pressures in WIPO negotiations
http://www.aful.org/wws/arc/patents/2003-03/msg00084.html