[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]
(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec)
(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
- From: James Heald <j.heald@ucl.ac.uk>
- To: Hartmut Pilch <phm@a2e.de>
- Cc: patents <patents@aful.org>
- Subject: Re: [Patents] "Further technical effect"
- Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 17:29:37 +0100
Hartmut Pilch wrote:
>
> TRIPs only says that exemptions from patentability should not be
> undertaken on an unsystematic basis.
>
> We never say that technicity is the only possible distinction criterion
> and that it should replace the list of non-inventions in Art 52(2).
>
> Only the patent lobby, e.g. McCarthy, says that.
Hence the way Gebhardt's Amendment 23 is written.
Subtle.
I'd missed that.
(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.
(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)