Making the case against software patents (Was: Re: [Fsfe-ie] Ivana Bacik
s_fsfeurope2 at nedprod.com
Mon May 24 19:52:28 CEST 2004
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 24 May 2004 at 10:13, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > If pro-patent supporters really don't want software to be
> > patentable, why are they opposing the clarifying amendments such as
> > the EP came up with?
> > I'd like to see them explain that one. If they try, quote the
> > specific amendment which means "computer software shall not be
> > patentable full stop period forever" and ask them precisely what is
> > wrong with that amendment.
> Playing devil's advocate, I suspect they would argue that such an
> amendment would mean that physical inventions with a component that is
> software (eg. a form of computer-controlled lathe) would not be
> patentable, and they consider this to be undesirable. By this point
> they have successfully blunted your argument.
Except that even pro-patent supporters claim to not support the
ability to patent something containing software just because the
software alone contains the inventive step of the invention.
One can use their own arguments against them by contrasting their
actions against what they say they believe.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: idw's PGP-Frontend 18.104.22.168 / 9-2003 + PGP 8.0.2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the FSFE-IE