Software Patents Directive (“Thank you, Poland!”) Erik Josefsson Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure Uniwersytet Jagielloński Intellectual.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Intellectual Property Protection Considerations in a Global Economy Keith D. Grzelak, Chair IEEE-USA Intellectual Property Policy Committee.
Advertisements

Role of National Parliaments
ITU WORKSHOP ON STANDARDS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (IPR) ISSUES Session 5: Software copyright issues Dirk Weiler, Chairman of ETSI General Assembly.
Managing Intellectual Property Assets in International Business Anil Sinha, Counsellor, SMEs Division World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
Software: To Patent or Not? Jeffrey P. Kushan Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy, LLP.
Protection of Computer Software and Databases Arkadiusz Kwapisz, Examiner Patent Examination Department Patent Office of the Republic of Poland Software-implemented.
THE LATEST DEVELOPMENT IN TRIAL OF IP CASES BY PRC COURTS —— IP-related anti-monopoly judicial review DING WENLIAN Shanghai High People’s Court.
1 April 2005Alain Moscowitz1 Confederation of European Computer User Associations Confédération Européenne des Associations d´Utilisateurs des Technologies.
Ownership of Computer Software Ethical Questions and Concerns.
Copyright and Alternatives to Copyright Why now? Rita S. Heimes Director, Technology Law Center University of Maine School of Law Rita S. Heimes Director,
© Suzanne Scotchmer 2007 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial.
Intellectual Property
1 Intellectual Property Includes the results of intellectual activities in the arts, sciences, and industry Includes the results of intellectual activities.
Software Protection & Scope of the Right holder Options for Developing Countries Presentation by: Dr. Ahmed El Saghir Judge at the Council of State Courts.
Innovation, Growth and Patents on CIIs in the EU Federico Etro June 2005.
MPEG-4 & Windows Media Dr. Jordi Ribas-Corbera Lead Program Manager, Codecs Digital Media Division Microsoft Corp
Instructions for using this template. Remember this is Jeopardy, so where I have written “Answer” this is the prompt the students will see, and where.
The European Agenda for Culture The OMC and the Structured dialogue with civil society.
Dr. Michael Berger, European Patent Attorney © Michael Berger Intellectual Property (IP): Patents for Inventions.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY COPYRIGHTS, PATENTS AND TRADE MARKS.
Copyright in the EU: UPDATE Pearle conference Geneva - agenda point 12 Saturday 30 May 2009.
GA June 2012, AHL Meeting FVE General Assembly Amsterdam (NL), Friday 8 June 2012 Agenda point 9b: Animal Health Law a brief update Jan Vaarten Executive.
Categories of Claims in the Field of CII Edoardo Pastore European Patent Office Torino, October 2011.
Directive on Patentability of Computer-Implemented Inventions (CII) Leo Baumann EICTA CII Task Force Vilnius 23 June 2004 EICTA Positioning & Campaign.
Introduction to IP Ellen Monson Director Intellectual Property Office University of Cincinnati.
CS-202: Law For Computer Science Professionals Class 1: Introduction David W. Hansen, Instructor September 29, 2005 © 2005 Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher.
An Overview of Intellectual Property Law, Policy, and Controversy Michael J. Madison University of Pittsburgh School of Law February 16, 2006.
Varian Australia Pty Ltd – Some Patenting Issues David Carmichael 6 th May 2004.
1 REACH, the Future EU policy for Chemicals European Conference in Eretria April 27, 2004 Tony Musu – European Trade Union Technical Bureau/ETUC.
Why the Data Protection Act was brought in  The 1998 Data Protection Act was passed by Parliament to control the way information is handled and to give.
Promotion of Innovation: Usefulness and value of Patent Information Andrew Czajkowski Head, Innovation and Technology Support Section Ulaanbaatar March.
1 Analysis of Consumer Issues and Paths for Concrete Approaches Dr. Carsten Orwat Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe in the Helmholtz Association, Institute for.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY Chapter 6. WHAT IS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY? Intellectual Property is a term used to describe works of the mind (art, books, films,
Conseil des Communes et Régions d'Europe Council of European Municipalities and Regions Council of European Municipalities and Regions CEMR Dr. Angelika.
Laws Jamie Dunn.
Social Europe New start for social dialogue 13 October 2015.
Intellectual Property Right Bernard Denis, DG-KTT.
ABA China Inside and Out September , Beijing The interface between competition law and intellectual property Nicholas Banasevic, DG Competition,
Copyright and Intellectual Property Right 1. 2 Use and Protection of Intellectual Property in Online Business Intellectual property (general term) includes:
Facilitate Authors’ Rights Access for Audiovisual Media in Europe.
1 Patent Claim Interpretation under Art. 69 EPC – Should prosecution history be used to interpret the patent? presented at Fordham 19th Annual Conference.
Robert J. Hart CPA, EPA, FBCS Proposal for a Directive on the patentability of computer- implemented inventions  Commission proposal - 20 February 2002.
Espacenet and Patent Searching Dr Dolores Cassidy Patent Examiner 09 October 2015.
1 1 EU developments in the MiFID review Council of the EU European Parliament November 2012: Note on progress of negotiations 13.
Tony Howard Patents Directorate DTI – Intellect 19 November 2004 The CII Directive & other policy issues.
Introducing EPO PATSTAT EPO Worldwide Patent Statistical Database James Rollinson.
Monetizing Usage of Scholarly Collections with Patent Citation Analysis Paul Canning, Director Publication Marketing IATUL, Porto, Portugal.
Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency 3rd Health Programme The Electronic Submission System (JA 2015) Georgios MARGETIDIS.
This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This courseware reflects the views only of the authors,
M a i w a l d P a t e n t a n w a l t s G m b H München Düsseldorf Hamburg New York Page 1 The patentability of business methods and software-related inventions.
A CP patent in European policy Dr Ali Al-fatlawi.
Digital Single Market Valentinas KVIETKUS Baltic Assembly, Ryga
Copyright Vs Patent Software authors lost their rights Benjamin Henrion Knowright2008 Krakow, 19 September 2008.
INTRO. To I.T Razan N. AlShihabi
Intro to Intellectual Property 3.0
Ethics & Social Responsibility
What can we expect from the lawyers ?
Legal challenges related to software vulnerability disclosure
IPR’s: new challenges and opportunities
Accelerating your Patent Prosecution in Mexico
Patentability of AI related inventions
Commission proposal for a Directive on
The EU trademark reform package – Back to status quo?
Protection of Computer-Related Invention in Japan
Protection of AI Inventions in Japan
IPR-related issues in artificial intelligence
Computer ethics in computer science curriculum
Intellectual Property
Chapter # 6 Intellectual Property
What can we expect from the lawyers ?
Presentation transcript:

Software Patents Directive (“Thank you, Poland!”) Erik Josefsson Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure Uniwersytet Jagielloński Intellectual property law international conference Krakow, 22 April, 2005

About FFII Pan-European non-profit association founded in 1999, representing 1,200 companies and 75,000 individuals Focussed on exclusion rights policy issues Promotes copyright, free competition and open standards

Expression of needs We rely on software copyright. We need to be sure that we own what we write. We need to be sure that we can publish and distribute our own programs. We need to be sure that, as long as we respect the rules of copyright, we can run any software on any office or network computer.

Directive history Feb 2002 – Commission proposal Dec 2002 – Report European Economic and Social Committee (ESC): Commission text “without sufficient consideration of the economic factors” Sep 2003 – First reading of the EP: follows ESC, SME and consumer organisations, many economic studies

EP achievements 2003 TRIPS/EPC connection Clear and effective limits Freedom of publication Interoperability

Council mess 2004 Legal uncertainty: “Computer programs are not patentable inventions” vs. “computer program on its own can be claimed” Rules based on dysfunctional EPO practice (“further technical effect”), no clarifying definitions No real interoperability safeguards Redefines “computer program as such” to “source code of one individual computer program”

Rethoric confusion 2005 ~ granted software patents in gauss database "Nothing that is not patentable now will be made patentable by the directive." Charlie McCREEVY, European Parliament Plenary Session, 8 March 2005

Rethoric confusion (2) "The Commission's intention in making its proposal was to avoid patenting of pure software and clearly differentiate the EU from the US." Charlie McCREEVY, European Parliament Plenary Session, 8 March 2005 Pending Estonia ( ) Microsoft Matsushita Samsung Alcatel Sony Siemens Canon Nokia Philips Broadcom Pending Poland ( ) Microsoft Samsung NEC Matsushita Canon Pioneer Ricoh Ntt Docomo TSE Sony

Rethoric confusion (3) "...the policy of the EPO... no patents on pure software (first point) no patents on business methods, and no patents on algorithms per se. I think that this is the three main messages that you should keep in mind” Alain Pompidou, President of the European Patent Office European Parliament information day 30 March 2005 EPO have granted (more than) 689 USPTO Class 705 Business Method Patents USPT O class 705 EPO class ??? equivalents

Patent example "Method of digital recording" a "digital recording device" provides data, stores data, defines data, copies data and deletes data, and the data is processed according to the instructions of the claimed computer program. EP (pending)

Council mess: Program claims Claim 1. A method of digital recording comprising: providing a playback file (34) for storing a stream of data(40); defining, within said playback file, a first section (51) to be recorded; copying a second section (35, 36) of said playback file to a new file (55) thereby providing an updated playback file (34'); deleting at least one section (541, 542)from said playback file thereby providing a record comprising said first section. Claim 20. A computer program which, when loaded and executed by a digital recording device, causes said digital recording device: to provide a playback file (34) for storing a stream of data (40); to define, within said playback file, a first section (51) to be recorded; to copy a second section (35, 36) of said playback file to a new file (55) thereby providing an updated playback file (34'); to delete at least one section (541, 542)from said playback file thereby providing a record comprising said first section.

Council mess: Program claims (2) Council Art. 4.1: "A computer program as such cannot constitute a patentable invention." EP : "[claim] 19. A computer program for executing a method according to any preceding claim."

Council mess: Program claims (3) Council Art. 5.2: "A claim to a computer program [...] when loaded and executed in a [...] programmable apparatus, put into force a product or process claimed in the same patent application EP : "[claim] 20. A computer program which, when loaded and executed by a digital recording device, causes said digital recording device: to [method of Claim 1]

Exclusion rights benchmarks cheap fast narrow safe expensive slow broad dangerous (to promote innovation)

Thank you for your attention! Please visit and and