Pass legal clarifications to substantive patent law to rule software patents out

Pass legal clarifications to substantive patent law to rule soft patents out. This clarifications should include negative and positive instructions about what should be patentable, providing reliable tests for patent examiners. We are open to alternative teachings that contribute to stop software patents worldwide. Two major recommandations are:

1. A claimed object that consists only of instructions for use of generic data processing hardware (universal computer), also called “program for computers” or “computer-implemented solution”, is not an invention in the sense of patent law, regardless of the form in which it is claimed.
2. A claimed object can be an invention in the sense of patent law only if it contributes knowledge to the state of the art in a field of applied natural science.

What is applied natural science?

Put a definition here

Ten Core Clarifications

The ten core clarifications are a set of amendments to the EU software patent directive that won great support in the second reading.

Case law solutions

Legal teachings are merely instrumental to political objectives of the legislator and unsuitable for deciding to apply an incentive system to a market. Thus scope of patent law cannot be decided in bipartisan proceedings before a court where judges are incompetent to consider market effects.

Patent institutions

What the European Patent Office can do

Add a New Comment
or Sign in as Wikidot user
(will not be published)
- +