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

[MJ Ray]

PILCH Hartmut <address@hidden> wrote:
> See the new UKPTO documentation
>       http://swpat.ffii.org/vreji/gasnu/uk/
> which will appear on the Net in a few minutes.  Although it doesn't
> contain any UKPTO horror patent samples yet, it contains much else that is
> useful for a concerted effort of attacking the UKPTO in the media and
> among the politicians, and assorting the horror gallery is imho just a
> question of time.

This is very bad.  Very bad indeed.  In short, terrible.  Please, I strongly
suggest that you remove that until you have had the wording examined more
closely.  Attempting to demonise the British people will not win you support
here.  This page is also rewriting history with such absurdities as "free
software such as GNU/Linux has had a particularly late start in Britain"
(although we are later than many in forming a specifically Free Software
group, there has been a movement through the LUGs, UKUUG, etc) and "Britain
cultivates its traditionally close ties to the USA".  (What tradition?  They
fought a war to escape our rule and were largely against us for many years
afterwards.)

Your apparent bias against case law systems is also not going to help you
win friends in this country.  Case law cannot be "eroded" as you suggest. 
Once a precendent has been set, it requires legislation to overturn.  This
often happens: an example is the rulings stating that asylum *seekers*
cannot be detained while their applications are processed, which will
require a new law to permit that.  Different precedents may be set for
different particular questions, but in general the aim is for the spirit of
one ruling will be translated to the new context.  Yes, this is still
dangerous when things are vague or undefined, but at least we get a
case-based way to cure problems created by the legislature.

Yes, I believe there are problems here.  

Yes, I believe we would welcome your assistance in correcting them.

Yes, I believe we are willing to campaign on this.

BUT!

No, the UK practice is not (yet) as bad as the US or EPO ones.

No, the problem is not "Britain" or "the British".

No, we are not going to conduct a revolution and replace our case law system
with a more common legal code system.

Within those parameters, please let's discuss how we solve this problem:

> Moroever, we have ample evidence that the UKPTO has made the British gov't
> the most active promoter of software patentability in Europe.

It suggests that the correct next steps are to find out what the UK (nb
*NOT* British) Government have done, why they did it and how they can be
convinced to correct their position.

-- 
MJR