[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]

(074db819ec% subtitle %074db819ec)


(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)chronological(074db819ec% END %074db819ec) (074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Thread(074db819ec% END %074db819ec) 
(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec)
(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Reply to sender(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) (074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)to list(074db819ec%END%074db819ec)

(074db819ec% IF user.email == 'jonas.maebe@ugent.be' || is_owner %074db819ec) (074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)


On 17 nov 2004, at 11:55, Steve Probert wrote:

Others on this list may be interested to know that the UK Patent Office
appealed against the High Court's decision and the Court of Appeal found
(unanimously) in favour of the Patent Office; so the patent did not get
granted.

I forwarded this information to Reinier Bakels (http://www.ivir.nl/staff/bakels.html, which currently seems to be down), and he replied the following:

***
In the UK, the grant of software patents is subject to the same rules as
applied by the EPO.
There is an extensive explanation on this subject at 1.25 in
http://www.patent.gov.uk/patent/reference/mpp/ss1-6.pdf
Somewhere in the UK Patent Statute it says that UK judges *must* take EPO
TBA decisions into consideration as if it were UK case law (I can't find the
section right now).
***

Could you elaborate on this?

Thanks,


Jonas





(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.

(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)