X-Sympa-To: patents
Return-Path: <ehj@cleosan.com>
Delivered-To: patents@aful.org
Received: from outmx023.isp.belgacom.be (outmx023.isp.belgacom.be [195.238.2.204])
	by stabilite.aful.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EB7D839BD
	for <patents@aful.org>; Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:04:41 +0100 (CET)
Received: from outmx023.isp.belgacom.be (localhost [127.0.0.1])
        by outmx023.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-OUT-2.22) with ESMTP id iAGKxlvH001440
        for <patents@aful.org>; Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:59:47 +0100
        (envelope-from <ehj@cleosan.com>)
Received: from [192.168.1.163] (155-201.241.81.adsl.skynet.be [81.241.201.155])
        by outmx023.isp.belgacom.be (8.12.11/8.12.11/Skynet-OUT-2.22) with ESMTP id iAGKxiGf001414;
	Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:59:44 +0100
        (envelope-from <ehj@cleosan.com>)
Message-ID: <419A6A3F.5010007@cleosan.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:59:43 +0100
From: Erik Josefsson <ehj@cleosan.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (X11/20040923)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: James Heald <j.heald@ucl.ac.uk>
Cc: Richard Page <richard_page@dsl.pipex.com>,
	Patent Forum <patents@aful.org>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [Patents] Dreadful Guardian Article]
References: <419A0CE3.9030500@dsl.pipex.com> <419A126C.2000405@ucl.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <419A126C.2000405@ucl.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Validation-by: ehj@cleosan.com

James Heald wrote:
> Richard Page wrote:
> 
>> The interesting point in all these documents is that they insist that
>> the directive has nothing to do with software.
>>
> 
> This was also McGann's line, expressed very forcefully, at the meeting 
> of Conservative bloc MEPs last Tuesday.
> 
> Paraphrasing:
> 
> -- "We represent the whole industry.  Not one of our members wants 
> software patents.  That's why we support the Council text.  But the 
> parliament amendments would cripple the whole industry".
> 
> However, when asked specifically whether or not a new algorithm which 
> allowed a square roots to be calculated more quickly (ie the UK case 
> "Gale's application") was a software patent, he said he was unable to 
> speak for his members on that point...

James, can you correct me?

At the meeting, I remember Malcolm Harbour quoting the Council "software 
as such" aricle. I replied it would have been helpful if he had read the 
Council definition of CII instead (what a computer does etc).

But Actually, I remeber McGann also read loud from the Council text, the 
"normal physical interactions" from article 4a.2). I took it up and 
asked the audience to think about the clarity of such a law compairing 
with something more understandable like normal interaction between a 
recepie and a kitchen.

McGann came up top me afterwards and invited me to his house saying if I 
ever came by, he would show me some interaction between a recipie and a 
kitchen I would not consider normal :-)

So I guess I did something right at the Kauppi event.

//Erik

