Re: [Fsfe-uk] Software patents - some hope?

[Alex Hudson]

Hi Chris,

On Sun, 2003-06-08 at 14:15, Chris Lale wrote:
> "There are circumstances in which protection regimes can stifle 
> creativity and subvert the public interest. Software patenting is 
> potentially one of these areas. ... The Economic and Social Council of 
> the European Union and the German Monopoly Commission have strongly 
> criticised the Directive, as have the Liberal Democrats in this country. 
> ... Liberal Democrats ... will be working to ammmend the directive as it 
> stands."

Good work!

> One Conservative MEP replied telling me that Arlene McCarthy herself has 
> proposed an ammendment concerning the dubious "technical effect":
> "Article 4a
> Exclusions from patentability:
> A computer-implemented invention shall not be regarded as making a technical
> contribution merely because it involves the use of a computer, network or 
> other
> programmable apparatus. Accordingly, inventions involving computer programs
> which implement business, mathematical or other methods and do not produce any
> technical effects beyond the normal physical interactions between a program
> and the computer, network or other programmable apparatus in which it is
> run shall not be patentable."

I really don't get this stuff at all, at all, at all. "Normal physical
interactions" needs to be defined - I doubt very much whether there
exists any software which goes beyond the normal physical interactions. 

I also don't get how they think they can protect business methods and
mathematical methods under this exclusion - currently, the law treats
business methods and software identically (i.e., they both fall under
the 'as such' exclusion). Why should software be treated differently,
under this reasoning? Why don't they allow business methods to be
patented, if they exhibit a technical effect? I think those questions
are unanswerable, because they cannot make a firm case for software
patents.

> Perhaps the lobbying is having some effect?. I think that the definition 
> and consequences of the dubious "technical effect" are still a major 
> concern though.

We have to make sure that any directive that may implement software
patents is as narrow as possible, to limit what possible damage it might
do. The definition above of 'technical effect' appears to be very
self-contradictory though. I do hope the lobbying is having some effect,
and encourage people to keep it up..

FYI, Richard Stallman had an article on software patenting published in
Guardian's "Life" section on Thursday - does anyone perchance have a
copy of the article? I might be able to get hold of one, depending on
the recycling schedules at chez Hudson. If anyone else does have a copy,
it would be interesting to see. Among other things, it also included a
link to www.softwarepatents.co.uk.

Cheers,

Alex.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part