[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ossig] Patent Covers at al
Harish Pillay wrote:
>I think you are correct about the Singapore patent law. I was speaking with an
>"IP" lawyer two weeks about and asked about software patents and she did say
>that it is not part of the law, but there is a way to do it. I need
>to do more work
>to find out evidence of software patents in Singapore.
neither did Singapore reinvent patent law ... !
The EPC does not permit software patents; but the EPO has been granting
software patents in the thousands. The same ugly tricks are applied
worldwide: you don't patent 'software' but a 'method to ...'
Which is patentable.
You might as well be surprised that the USPTO had been most outspoken
against software patents; but have been forced to patent software by the
courts as recent as 1981.
Software patents always result from a very unholy alliance of patent
attorneys (money) and patent offices (vastly different reason, from
money (EPO) to inflated perception of relevancy (XXX)).
I still have the slides that I used for my 1.5 hour lecture "Is Computer
Science inventive – obvious – trivial ?" to the representatives of the
ASEAN patent offices in early 2005, when they met in KL for a fortnight
under the seminar title 'ASEAN Workshop on Search and Examination in the
field of Computer Related Inventions'. The slides are not
self-explanatory and intended for trained Intellectual Property people;
but they could as well be modified and used for an interested public of
FOSS or else, in parts, where they summarise history and intentions of
patents; including the history of software patents; and some ridiculous
examples of software patents.
Btw.: Has anyone sorted out the 'password problem' of those cover pages
? Anyone a comment on that Exchange lock-in ?
To unsubscribe: send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org
with "unsubscribe ossig" in the body of the message