|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, October 15 2012 @ 02:24 AM EDT |
The danger is that when they do now make a legal definition,
they will do so in such a way that will extend the scope of
patents as they have always done, unless precedents from
other areas that limit patentability are cited by analogy.
Remember, the decision on the legal definition is going to
be made by patent lawyers and judges who are supposed to be
patent experts, and most of them have a vested interest in
twisting the definition to increase the scope of
opportunities for their law practices.
I have been to one of the UK patent office workshops on
software patentability many years back, and they really were
not interested in defining the terms used in the over
broadly defined law any more precisely. It was evident that
it was more of an exercise to see what excuses
justifications they could make for keeping the present law,
and that they already decided what they wanted and were only
carrying out the workshops in order be able to say that
consultation had been made with Industry.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|