On 15 Aug 2003 at 19:26, MJ Ray wrote:
Being defeatist is the single best way to ensure that we get a form of software patents. Devil and the deep blue sea. Given this, I'm arguing that "These are crap because X, Y, Z but please at least don't let them do A, B, C."
I think we already have software patents. The directive claims to clarify the situation so it too acknowledges that they already are in effect here. It's just that no one can really say /how/ they are in effect yet which is what the directive is supposed to sort out.
Core is that I regard programs as a branch of mathematics, discoveries not inventive acts.
Programs aren't mathematics because they are eternally useful ie; do something without the involvement of a human. Therefore they should reside in a totally unique category from either mathematics or anything else. DNA sequences however would fit right where computer programs go.
I also look forward to patenting electronic documents, etc, if they really screw it up.
It's why we need the "forum to register abuses" amendment. Then you could patent your document, and register a complaint against yourself for doing so :)
And yet, we are often told that one reason for this is to reduce the ambiguity in the current system.
Too many cooks spoil the broth.
[...]
The third highly important amendment is needing to set what precisely involves an inventive step. I would make it high ie; "a substantial advance over the status quo".
Is this not fixed already? I thought you said you couldn't change EPO rules. Immovability of this has been suggested as one reason why we must have them voted down.
EPO rules on paper are quite high. In practice, those rules appear to be almost unenforced. This is probably why most MEP's are mistaken in thinking that the EPO is a responsible patent office.
I don't see why an amendment couldn't mandate all EPO software patents to have to run through a board of say ten independently selected experts in software. Problem would be, who pays?
This can be argued in that the hundreds of millions of euro saved by SME's in legal costs in not having to take software patent infringements to court are well worth paying a few hundred thousand in board fees annually.
Cheers, Niall