ODP:Re: [Patents] "Further technical effect"

[halber@idea.net.pl]

Erik Josefsson <erikjosefsson@telia.com> wrote:

> Gregory Aharonian <srctran@world.std.com> wrote:


> >  And at least in the US, there is
> > no evidence that software developers are experiencing any higher
> > levels of restricted self-expression than any other developers (such
> > as the ability to express thoughts about newly discovered gene
> > sequences).  No evidence.

> The Federal Trade Commission will soon publish a study that I hope 
will
> correct your interpretation of data. Or maby you just have the wrong
> data?

Those who were in Dorint know that in half a year the US Federal Trade 
Commission would release a study on competition and patents. Privately 
Commissioner Thompson suggested the study would change a way the 
US PTO is run and can undermine some basic assumptions made by 
McCarthy. 

Everybody who will visit Commission&#8217;s site 
http://www.ftc.gov/opp/intellect/index.htm without trouble can read ;
transcripts and supplementary material of mammoth hearings conducted 
in California. The main conclusions of the foreseen report are for sure to 
find on these more as thousand pages. I think we should prepare some 
excerpts (including part of Greg&#8217;s contribution) before June 18 vote as 
an argument to campaign for its postponement.

During the hearings critical voices were mainly raised against particulars 
of American situation. Europe with the EPO is often presented as a better 
place. The EPO is praised for not accepting business patents and for an 
option of opposition procedure before the patent is finally granted.

My comment: The opposition procedure is not working with software 
patents. Only because of an internal EPO regulation is difficult for an 
examiner to argue lack of technicality and public is unable to oppose 
granting such a patent. And we in Europe as a balance to the EPO don&#8217;t 
have an institution like the FTC.

Jozef Halbersztadt