Re: [Patents] technology definition amendments

[Hartmut Pilch <phm@a2e.de>]

> > economic analysis to determine how patenting would affect that matter.
> > Studies done on one type of subject matter simply cannot be assumed to
> > apply to another.
>
> I agree. I think the Bakels-Hugenholtz suggestion of creating a
> patent observatory is a reasonable thing, that would go in that
> direction.

Moving the observing function from the science community as a whole to
a particular state institution may not help all that much.  If the
observatory is a toothless research institute, it won't change much.
If it is invested with powers, a problem of democratic control again
arises.

In any case, the TRIPs treaty would have to be changed and attempts at
finding a worldwide standard given up.

All that is a much more radical proposal than the demand to define
"technical" as it has been traditionally defined.  I see the danger of
people evading thorny political questions and replacing them with
proposals for big spending.  Similar to McCarthy's upcoming proposal of
patent insurance to help SMEs.  Spending public money on something that
looks politically correct is always much more comfortable than defending
the public interest.

-- 
Hartmut Pilch, FFII & Eurolinux Alliance              tel. +49-89-18979927
Protecting Innovation against Patent Inflation       http://swpat.ffii.org/
150,000 votes 2000 firms against software patents    http://noepatents.org/