Re: [Fsfe-uk] Software patents

[Ramanan Selvaratnam]

> If anyone who is more clued up about this issue than I 
> am 
I am ever so confused and concerned by the constant repetetive ranting 
by people who seem to be responding to anti-software patent lobbying.

> has ideas for a suitable response, please let me know.
This is not a suitable response but I feel more explanations with 
examples are needed than repetetive chanting in circles.

> ************************
> The patenting of computer-implemented inventions 
What's this?  I have heard it so many times that it makes me wonder 'is 
there one single source who put this on these pro-software patents people'?

Can they give an example ...ever?
Maybe this has nothing to do with software as the Stonehenge is also 
regarded a computer!

> is not a new phenomenon:
?!

> [...]
>
> The aim of the proposal going through the European Parliament is to harmonise 
> and clarify the law, to stop the expansion of the patents system, and stem 
> the current drift towards broadening the scope of innovation in software that 
> can be patented. 
There is no such practice of patenting software (by law) in europe or 
most of this planet.
Please let me know if I am wrong .

> There is a need to ensure that patents for 
> computer-implemented inventions 
not again!!

> are granted on the same footing across the 
> European Union and that national courts can deal with contested patents on 
> the basis of uniform principles and within an EU legal framework.
So the concern now is to make it easy for the law.
So dammit! Do not introduce software patents!!! The law works smoothly 
without such complications, already ...does it not?

If the EPO had made mistakes accept it, make amends and everything is 
nice and easy.

Are all 16 000 'computer implemented technologies'  that have been 
granted patents, under threat if software patenting proposals are scrapped?
One should be happy if they do not get affected as we have not wasted 
some public money. If the opposite is true still there is plenty of room 
to be happy as a major wastage of public funding (on law) and  
destruction of  sustainable  technology development opportunities would  
have been averted.