In addition to the FFII paper above, there is also a paper I put together that shows the UKPO's assertions about what "technical" software is seems to be very different to what the Commission report of 2002 says it is.
Software Patents: Clarity or Status Quo?
I mainly would request to anyone who is thinking of attending just to ask them to explain 'technical' in clear, understandable language- what does it mean?.
Is calculating and ordering information technical, yes or no? Are methods of performing mental acts technical? Are computer programs technical in the sense of art 52 epc? What about the rights of software authors to publish their works under Arts 10 and 13 of TRIPS and the fact that the broadness of patents interferes with this? This is the debate they don't seem to want to have in the open- but restating all this nonsense about "technical" software I feel really insults my intelligence and the intellect of every programmer who has had the misfortune to be caught up in this debate.
I would like to see a vote in the House of Commons (or even the Lords) to see if the British government really support this line on unlimited patentability before this kind of pro-council document conference goes ahead- if this campaign is all to be done in the name of the Government, there can be no harm in obtaining consensus through a vote. (The primary executive, not the quangos - an issue this important must be put before the House. IMHO)
I have a feeling that many backbenchers in all parties will be very interested to hear what is going on and being banded about outside the UK as the "official line" , and I doubt that many will support this line after seeing how other countries have pulled up their Governments over the semantic alchemy in the Council document - and demanded a recount.
Slashdot Mirror
Software Patents: Clarity or Status Quo? I mainly would request to anyone who is thinking of attending just to ask them to explain 'technical' in clear, understandable language- what does it mean?.
Is calculating and ordering information technical, yes or no? Are methods of performing mental acts technical? Are computer programs technical in the sense of art 52 epc? What about the rights of software authors to publish their works under Arts 10 and 13 of TRIPS and the fact that the broadness of patents interferes with this? This is the debate they don't seem to want to have in the open- but restating all this nonsense about "technical" software I feel really insults my intelligence and the intellect of every programmer who has had the misfortune to be caught up in this debate.
I would like to see a vote in the House of Commons (or even the Lords) to see if the British government really support this line on unlimited patentability before this kind of pro-council document conference goes ahead- if this campaign is all to be done in the name of the Government, there can be no harm in obtaining consensus through a vote. (The primary executive, not the quangos - an issue this important must be put before the House. IMHO)
I have a feeling that many backbenchers in all parties will be very interested to hear what is going on and being banded about outside the UK as the "official line" , and I doubt that many will support this line after seeing how other countries have pulled up their Governments over the semantic alchemy in the Council document - and demanded a recount.