X-Sympa-To: patents
Return-Path: <ehj@cleosan.com>
Delivered-To: patents@aful.org
Received: from av7-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (av7-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net [81.228.11.113])
	by stabilite.aful.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4139357E60
	for <patents@aful.org>; Mon, 31 May 2004 12:17:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by av7-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502)
	id E552837E86; Mon, 31 May 2004 11:48:00 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net [81.228.11.164])
	by av7-1-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D095137E4C
	for <patents@aful.org>; Mon, 31 May 2004 11:48:00 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from cleosan.com (h14n2fls33o988.telia.com [213.67.225.14])
	by smtp3-2-sn1.fre.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86B0837E4B
	for <patents@aful.org>; Mon, 31 May 2004 11:48:00 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <40BAFF50.6090302@cleosan.com>
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 11:48:00 +0200
From: Erik Josefsson <ehj@cleosan.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (X11/20040229)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: patents@aful.org
Subject: Re: [Patents] Software Patents in Europe: Short Overview
References: <40B79531.25F7FB72@RealMeasures.dyndns.org> <00c401c446ec$7ed60d40$0300a8c0@eu3d1>
In-Reply-To: <00c401c446ec$7ed60d40$0300a8c0@eu3d1>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Validation-by: ehj@cleosan.com

Jacek Gancarson Eurofresh wrote:

> I find this text very explanatory and balanced.

Me too :-)

>>>http://kwiki.ffii.org/?ShortIntroEn

>>Market, at the time under commissioner Mario Monti)) *attempted to delete
>>all the exclusions listed under Art 52 of the European Patent Convention.*
>>Due to public resistance which they apparently did not anticipate, this
>>effort failed.

Erwin J. Basinski reports in november 2000:

"A Diplomatic Conference to Revise the European Patent Convention began 
at the EPO in Munich on November 20 and runs through November 29, 2000. 
  This meeting is considering recommended changes to the Articles and 
Rules of the EPC.  The Basic proposal for the revision of the European 
Patent Convention (CA/100/00e) recommends many changes including:

     Bringing Article 52(1) into line with Article 27(1), first sentence,
     of the TRIPS  Agreement with a view to: enshrining technology in
     the basic provision of substantive European patent law, clearly
     defining the scope of the EPC, and making it plain that patent
     protection is available to technical inventions of all kinds.

     Deleting Computer Program Products from Article 52(2)(c) EPC in
     view of the fact that the Boards of Appeal have confirmed that
     computer programs producing a technical effect, as a rule, are
     patentable subject matter under the EPC. and

     Possibly deleting Article 52(2) and (3) in their entirety.

It was thought that these Boards of Appeal cases on computer programs 
and the recommended changes would result, at least, in the deletion of 
computer programs from Article 52(2) EPC.  However, in a surprising 
development in September 2000, at a meeting of the Administrative 
Council of the EPC, Germany, France, Italy, and others voted against 
deleting computer programs from Article 52(2) EPC.
 
http://www.mofo.com/news/general.cfm?MCatID=7615&concentrationID=&ID=152&Type=5

//Erik

