Re: [Patents] community patent

[Hartmut Pilch <phm@a2e.de>]

> > And in overall it is also difficult to understand... EPC (which
> > does not allow to patent programs) and this planned directive??
> > Which one will be more important? EPO will follow which one?
> > Courts will follow which?
>
> There are 2 directive, IIRC they are not contradictory with each other,
> courts
> may follow both. The swpat directive is in contradiction with the EPC.
> I think the EPC will have to be changed (or has already?, I think not)
> to include the EU as a contracting "state" for the swpat Directive,
> but this is already contemplated in the directive.

If the directive is passed, it will supersede Art 52 EPC.  Older laws are
superseded by newer laws, even if they are still in force.  Even without
the new law, many patent courts have, under the leadership of the EPO,
been happy to twist Art 52 EPC into meaninglessness.

> CP also puts a new higher court in charge, the Luxembourg court. This
> may be good or bad, depending on how it is appointed and how it works.

It certainly makes the CEC/McCarthy call for "harmonisastion" even more
hollow.  The Luxembourg court does not need a swpat directive in order to
be able to decide about european patent issues.  The sole purpose of the
directive would then be to make sure that the currently illegal software
patents can not be revoked.  Which is what CEC & McCarthy mean when they
talk about "legal security".

-- 
Hartmut Pilch, FFII & Eurolinux Alliance              tel. +49-89-12789608
Protecting Innovation against Patent Inflation       http://swpat.ffii.org/
145,000 votes 400 firms against software patents     http://noepatents.org/