Danish Referendum on the Unified Patent Court

[Carsten Agger]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 01/21/2014 09:04 AM, Matthias Kirschner wrote:

> 
> For the follow-up it might help you to read 
> https://fsfe.org/news/2013/news-20130612-01.en.html and the linked
>  documents. As you can read German also 
> <http://www.bundestag.de/bundestag/ausschuesse17/a06/anhoerungen/archiv/47_Patentierung_von_Computerprogrammen/04_Stellungnahmen/Stellungnahme_Kirschner.pdf>
>
>
> 
our written statement to the German Parliament.
> 
Thanks again for the input!

Here's a thought, though: Might the German Parliament's motion against
software patents be rendered irrelevant by the Unified Patent Court
and the European Patent?

If patents are awarded on the European level, and the UPC becomes the
highest instance for the enforcement of patents - and it ends up
following the current European Patent practise (see
http://webshop.ffii.org/) then it won't be possible to prevent the
enforcement of software patents on the national level.

That's the theory, at least. And the European Parliament has not voted
to prevent software patents in the European Patent. That's why we're
against ratified the UPC.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlLeNlMACgkQletyW1YzdSFrhACgn27uC7g+/K9vyqgjxPcE1R+v
KxwAn1a4R69H8sB7friFb+A+BidBQHPv
=YnMM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----