ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!
Difference between revisions of "Briefs submitted to EPO EBoA G3-08"
(* The briefs used to be on the EPO website at: http://www.epo.org/patents/appeals/eba-decisions/referrals/pending/briefs.html) |
(Official list: http://www.epo.org/patents/appeals/eba-decisions/pending/briefs.html) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{navbox}} | {{navbox}} | ||
The following is information about briefs submitted in response to the [[European Patent Office]]'s consultation [[EPO EBA referral G3-08]]. | The following is information about briefs submitted in response to the [[European Patent Office]]'s consultation [[EPO EBA referral G3-08]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Official list: http://www.epo.org/patents/appeals/eba-decisions/pending/briefs.html | ||
==Briefs that the EPO has already scanned and put online== | ==Briefs that the EPO has already scanned and put online== | ||
| Line 49: | Line 51: | ||
==External links== | ==External links== | ||
* [http://www.ipjur.com/blog2/index.php?/archives/70-Still-More-Amicus-Curiae-Briefs-Submitted-to-Registrar-of-Enlarged-Board-Of-Appeal-in-Case-G308.html ipjur.com looks at trends in the submitted briefs] | * [http://www.ipjur.com/blog2/index.php?/archives/70-Still-More-Amicus-Curiae-Briefs-Submitted-to-Registrar-of-Enlarged-Board-Of-Appeal-in-Case-G308.html ipjur.com looks at trends in the submitted briefs] | ||
| − | |||
Revision as of 20:06, 13 May 2010
The following is information about briefs submitted in response to the European Patent Office's consultation EPO EBA referral G3-08.
Official list: http://www.epo.org/patents/appeals/eba-decisions/pending/briefs.html
Briefs that the EPO has already scanned and put online
- AIPPI - pro-swpat
- April - anti-swpat
- Bakels, R. - at a glance, not clearly for or against
- Balos, I. - neither for nor against, doesn't answer the questions
- Bayer, C. - anti-swpat
- BIKT et al - in German, says swpat are anti-constitutional under German law
- Butler, M.J. - pro-swpat, I think
- Canonical Group Ltd. - anti-swpat
- Combeau, J. - mixed
- Cowsley, C. - anti-swpat by intention, but some statements see misinterpretable
- De Keyzer - anti-swpat
- Duhme,Torsten, Dr. - pro-swpat
- epi - pro-swpat, pro-technical but in a weak way
- FFII Sweden - anti-swpat
- FSFE(epo.org scan) - anti-swpat
- G-N-U GmbH - in German, probably anti-swpat
- Gustavson, Stefan - anti-swpat, but some statements seem misinterpretable
- Hallén, Jacob - anti-swpat
- HISPALINUX - anti-swpat
- IBM - pro-swpat "novel logic arrangements that can be implemented otherwise than as a computer program are therefore not necessarily excluded by Article 52."
- IIPCT - pro-swpat, a patent consultant writing on behalf of 7 SMEs from the Microsoft lobby community
- Illuminet - anti-swpat
- intellect - pro-swpat
- IZGSE - pro-swpat, but to honest, not to be from an anti-swpatter
- JIPA - pro-swpat
- Lawrence, William - anti-swpat
- Nullmeier, M. - unclear
- Philips - pro-swpat
- Piratenpartei - in German
- Piratpartiet - inadmissable, anti-technical, refuses to answer the questions
- ScriptumLibre - unsure. Seemingly anti-swpat, but there are some strange sentences
- Sterckx, Sigrid, Prof. Dr. - anti-swpat, but it's long and I didn't read all
- Straus, Joseph, Prof. Dr. - inadmissable
- Sylvestris, T. - explains that the referral is inadmissible, contains interesting discussion of previous cases
- Thum, Simon - anti-swpat, I think
- Wessel, A. - anti-swpat
Briefs submitted but not yet on the EPO's site
- End Software Patents
- Red Hat
- FFII submitted a brief (separate from that of FFII Sweden)
- IFSO.ie submitted a brief
- tmplab
