Re: [Patents] newsscan: Software patent limits 'go too far'

[Jean-Baptiste Soufron <jbsoufron@free.fr>]

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 09:59:28 +0200
Philippe Coulonges <cphil@cphil.net> wrote:

> Le Tue, 21 Oct 2003 21:54:09 +0200
> Jean-Baptiste Soufron <jbsoufron@free.fr> écrivait :
> 
> > The problem is that lax in itself does mean NOTHING. Law has to be
> > interpretated by judges and every interpretation is a new law in
> > itself.
> 
> That's a specificity of anglo-saxon style law system I never
> understood. Here (France) jurisprudence serves as a guideline, but
> doesn't make law. Does someone knows how it stands for european laws ?

In fact, everything is much more complicated because, even in France,
jurisprudence can be seen as a form of law. And, of course, the
anglo-saxon system is not that simple either. We practically share a
similar system as we both recoginze the "rule of law" (L'etat de droit)
but from 2 different point of views. 

I would say that European jurisprudence work more like the french one...
but I am not that sure about it :)