Re: [Fsfe-uk] Fwd: UK Leading Patents?

[MJ Ray]

First of all, just a short summary of the names for the major players for
our European advisors here.  I think these are correct:

 * UK Government - the whole ensemble of the national state administration,
including its representatives here and overseas;

 * M.*P - MP is an elected representative in the London parliament, MSP in
Edinburgh and MEP in Europe;

 * UKPTO - a UK Government agency (last I checked without any offices
overseas, including at the EPO, so presumably any lobbying is done through
the UKG representatives);

 * the British - the people of the largest part of the UK... please do not
use this term for UKG or other officials, else you will confuse the hell out
of me.  It also makes it sounds like the majority of the population are in
support of a task, which I cannot believe is the case;

Please try to help me understand who is doing what and who we must convince
to make it stop.

Now, on with the show.

PILCH Hartmut <address@hidden> wrote:
>> + UKPTO are driving the EPO toward complete patentability for software;
> No.  The EPO is already there.  But in the past, the british have had a
> major part in bringing it there.  Now they are at the forefront of those
> in Europe who want to stabilise this harmful and illegal EPO practise
> and make it obligatory for Britain and all others.

Which "British"?  For example, I have not been and I am not.  I need to know
who is responsible and who can change their stance.

> The UKPTO is pushing for the CEC/BSA directive proposal and for a change
> of Art 52.  They are the only ones in Europe who are pushing.  And they
> claim that their push is justified by the results of the british
> consultation, which is really a very bold intellectual maneuver.

I think it would be helpful to give the same references here as you did in
private email.  Which one is the best?

>> If the were, then people would have used it already. Technical effect
>> has been part of British law for years (1977).
> Could you cite a British law that actually uses this term?
> Not a court decision but a law?

I'm sure law such as the 1995 Patent Rules legislation will use it.  Finding
a legislative definition may be difficult.

> The EPO has been, due to its lack of controllability, the place where all
> the bold decisions were taken.  But they were pushed by british people,

Sorry, the British people have not been pushing them.  Some British people
may have been, but we need to know who.

> I am asking for a serious reintroduction of the concept of "technical
> invention".  If that can't be done, then they should stop fooling people
> with "technical effect".  We all know where that leads.  It is no longer a
> question of theory (known since Dispositionsprogramm) but of facts lying
> before our eyes.

Yes, this seems to be a good point to make.

> Like in the US, the British caselaw seems to have evolved on an
> unsystematic case-by-case basis.  [...] 

No, the US law system evolved like the British one, if you think about it.

> (1) The British have been the only major country that expressed suppport
> for the CEC/BSA approach at the 2002-03-01 meeting.

Right, *WHICH* British people, so we can highlight and find out why?  If
they are elected representatives, we can get to work.

> (2) See the statement of Robin Webb which he published on the morning of
> the EU/BSA directive publication.

http://swpat.ffii.org/vreji/papri/ukpto-swpat0202/index.en.html ?

I found that guy on a web site at last. 
http://www.patent.gov.uk/about/ippd/contact.htm
I wonder why he's not linked from the main staff list...

> (3) The UKPTO are continuing to organise propaganda rallies for software
> patentability, see the ibc-uk.co conference of June 18-19.  They refuse to
> let any serious opposition representative speak there.

Please, where is this?  (Sorry if I lost a URL.)  What was Georg talking at
last-but-one visit to London?  My memory is terrible.

> All this has apparently become possible due to a special british climate,
> characterised by
>  - strong grip of the UKPTO on governmental patent policy

Well, let's see what we can do on that one.

>  - legal and cultural traditions, affinity to the USA

This is cobblers.  Sorry.

>  - failure of most people to recognise the UKPTO's double talk
>    in its summary report of the consultation

This may be more significant than you realise.  Let's get in touch with CDR
and see what they're doing about it, if anything.

>  - lack of an organised opposition, weakness of free software

HM Opposition are in a bit of shambles at the moment, I think.  The smaller
parties and the government party's own backbenchers seem far more effective
at questioning the government.

> I am usually quite an admirer of british culture and british people, but
> in this case we are witnessing some of the shadowy sides.  Fortunately it
> takes only a fairly small group of conscious people to overcome the
> problem.  "All it takes for evil to prevail is that good men do nothing",
> as Edmund Burke said.  But we can mobilise the necessary few good people,
> and if we need to improve the rhetoric on some of our websites, I'll be
> glad to draw inspirations from your hints.

All that I would ask is for someone to assist you with the translations and
possibly make it easier to switch languages on the site.  (I tire of adding
"index.en.html" eventually... I know it's bad browser behaviour, but it's my
normal tool.)

OK, AFFS people... who will take the lead on running this campaign?  I'm
bailing out because of dealing with set-up red tape and too much marketing
of my own company for now.  Hopefully that's a good enough excuse.  If you
want ideas for tasks, don't hesitate to ask, but I promise not to criticise
anyone doing this marvellous service for us all ;-)

-- 
MJR ,----------------------------------------------------
    | Q. Do you need a net-based application developing, 
    |    or advice and training about web technology?
    | A. I suggest you try http://www.luminas.co.uk/