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

[Simo Sorce <simo.sorce@xsec.it>]

On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 00:21, Jean-Baptiste Soufron wrote:

> Yes but the political source of the law also created an exception so
> that inventions implementing a software could still be patented. The
> problem is that this exception became wider and wider as the text was
> not precise enough and as there were no consensus about it in the
> society. 

I would say that you are right, things can be interpreted the way you
say.
BUT
it can be done only by people that do not understand the matter, or that
understand the matter and really want to subvert the principles of the
law.

The "exception" as you call it, is a clarification that roughly means:
we aren't sayong that the fact that a machine use software makes it
unpatentable, we are saying that wahts patented is not the software part
of it as software cannot be patented, but only the innovative use of
controllable forces of nature can.
 
> > Moreover, even if that special case did not exist in the first place
> > (and it exists), we now have sufficient data and studies to show that
> > it should exist. Period.
> 
> I agree. The consensus is growing! 
> 
> That's much more important than changing the text. 

While I know it's true, I find it uncomfortable, as a computer
influenced guy, I like to think in terms of true and false, 1 and 0,
black and white ... "grey" areas are not well accepted in my field
generally as it lead to uncertainity :-)

> > > Plus, it does not look like everybody agrees. There are also
> > > questions raised by people afraid if there is no software patents.
> > > For example, why is it better to let them software be free when
> > > people who live from patented softwares could lose their jobs?
> > 
> > Don't worry, you will find other cases to bring in courts.
> 
> I don't care much about bringing cases to court. I just mean that law is
> much more made by courts than by parliaments. 

To a different degree in various countries ... in anglosaxon ones we
have case law ... maybe they are more realistic :)

> Parliaments vote the
> budget but they don't really create law, they vote it but everything
> else is left to the court. Law is a dynamic process that evolves with
> time and so on... Please just believe me on that :-)

> lol... 
> 
> Try to put divorce into a formal language and let's look at what will
> happen :-)

lol

> Don't forget you're talking to professionnals of this kind of
> exercises... :-)

the root of the evil ;-)

-- 
Simo Sorce - simo.sorce@xsec.it
Xsec s.r.l. - http://www.xsec.it
via Durando 10 Ed. G - 20158 - Milano
mobile: +39 329 328 7702
tel. +39 02 2399 7130 - fax: +39 02 700 442 399