Difference between revisions of "EPO EBoA referral G3-08"
(:''Breaking news: [http://news.swpat.org/2010/05/epo-publishes-review/ The EPO has now published it's (internal) review]'') |
(:''Breaking news: [http://news.swpat.org/2010/05/epo-patents-review-inadmissible/ EPO rules own software patents review inadmissible]'') |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{navbox}} | {{navbox}} | ||
| − | :''Breaking news: [http://news.swpat.org/2010/05/epo- | + | :''Breaking news: [http://news.swpat.org/2010/05/epo-patents-review-inadmissible/ EPO rules own software patents review inadmissible]'' |
In October 2008, the president of the [[European Patent Office]] referred question "'''G3/08'''" to the EPO's Enlarged Board of Appeals. The purpose was to ask for clarifications for interpreting the exclusion of "programs for computers" from patentability under Article 52 of the [[European Patent Convention]].<ref>http://www.epo.org/topics/news/2008/20081024.html</ref> As part of the referral process, a public consultation was held which ended on April 30th 2009.<ref>http://documents.epo.org/projects/babylon/eponet.nsf/0/B89D95BB305AAA8DC12574EC002C7CF6/$File/G3-08_en.pdf G3/08</ref> | In October 2008, the president of the [[European Patent Office]] referred question "'''G3/08'''" to the EPO's Enlarged Board of Appeals. The purpose was to ask for clarifications for interpreting the exclusion of "programs for computers" from patentability under Article 52 of the [[European Patent Convention]].<ref>http://www.epo.org/topics/news/2008/20081024.html</ref> As part of the referral process, a public consultation was held which ended on April 30th 2009.<ref>http://documents.epo.org/projects/babylon/eponet.nsf/0/B89D95BB305AAA8DC12574EC002C7CF6/$File/G3-08_en.pdf G3/08</ref> | ||
Revision as of 13:49, 12 May 2010
- Breaking news: EPO rules own software patents review inadmissible
In October 2008, the president of the European Patent Office referred question "G3/08" to the EPO's Enlarged Board of Appeals. The purpose was to ask for clarifications for interpreting the exclusion of "programs for computers" from patentability under Article 52 of the European Patent Convention.[1] As part of the referral process, a public consultation was held which ended on April 30th 2009.[2]
You can see the submitted briefs here: Briefs submitted to EPO EBA G3-08.
For the previous discussions on how best to reply to the public consultation (now closed), see EPO G3-08 brainstorming.
Contents
Questions of partiality
One amicus brief questioned the partiality of the board,[3] but the EPO disagreed and decided not to change the composition of the board.[4]
External links
epo.org links
- The October 2008 announcement
- The October 2008 announcement (alternative link)
- G3/08, the referral itself
- The pending queue of referrals, where this one was found
After receiving the responses to the consultation, the EPO published information to repeat its claim that it doesn't grant software patents:
Third-party articles
References
- ↑ http://www.epo.org/topics/news/2008/20081024.html
- ↑ http://documents.epo.org/projects/babylon/eponet.nsf/0/B89D95BB305AAA8DC12574EC002C7CF6/$File/G3-08_en.pdf G3/08
- ↑ http://documents.epo.org/projects/babylon/eponet.nsf/0/24132F14CDCF83F9C12575AD002AF47D/$File/G3-08_amicus_curiae_brief_Schulz_de.pdf
- ↑ http://documents.epo.org/projects/babylon/eponet.nsf/0/A29F9A464FCDEB05C12576620035166B/$File/G00003_08_interlocutory_en.pdf
