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

[Rui Miguel Seabra <rms@1407.org>]

On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 11:41, Jean-Baptiste Soufron wrote:
> And here is the interpretation of the EPO : 
> The article 3 just says that items listed in article 2 cannot be
> patented when people try to patent them alone. To the contrary, it also
> mean that items listed in article 2 can be patented if they are not
> patented alone. Then softwares can be patented when they are part of a
> patentable invention. 

Art. 52.3 doesn't just say that when they are alone they are not
patentable. It's also when they are part (relation with) of the
invention:

(3) The provisions of paragraph 2 shall exclude patentability of the
subject-matter or activities referred to in that provision only to the
extent to which a European patent application or European patent
**relates to such subject-matter** or ##activities as such##.

The part between ##'s is what you're saying.

> You should concentrate more on the consequences of these 2
> interpretations from legal, economic and social points of view than on
> the interpretation in itself. 

Well, the economic and social studies say that software patents, at
best, do not improve the situation.

So that part seems to be quite covered, and we already know who is
pushing for software patents (those who most profit with it, that is
lawyers, the *PO's -- remember that they're comprised mostly of lawyers
--- and some major corporations with huge patent portfolios).

Rui

-- 
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?

Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part