Quote:
Originally posted by Soul_Rebel
"Under the proposal, an ?invention? requires a contribution to the state of the art in a technical field. For an invention to be patentable it must be technical, new, non-obvious, and susceptible of industrial application. But the draft now states that a computer-implemented invention should not be regarded as making a technical contribution merely because it involves the use of a computer, network or other programmable apparatus.
This means that patents should not be granted for software inventions that implement business, mathematical or other methods and do not produce any technical effects beyond the normal physical interactions between a program and the machine or network on which it operates."
and thats how things should be
|
If this interpretation is correct, it's fantastic news!
But what the fuck is this guy talking about? ....
Quote:
The U.S. patent system has become a mace that large companies can use against smaller ones. Just the threat of a patent infringement suit incurs onerous legal fees on the threatened company. That can be enough to break a low-budget outfit or shutter an open source project.
The European nations that avoided these conditions can no longer breathe easy; the EC voted in favor of its software patent legislation. I find no pleasure in knowing that Europe will soon be in the same mess we?re in.
|
http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/...OPcurve_1.html 