ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

Difference between revisions of "Germany"

m (External links: * [http://eupat.ffii.org/gasnu/de/index.en.html FFII's page on swpats in Germany])
(===Judge Mellulis' comments===)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{Infobox|country-region-todo}}
 
{{Infobox|country-region-todo}}
==Legislation==
 
 
==Patent office practice==
 
To be added.
 
 
===Articles===
 
* http://www.esr-pollmeier.de/swpat/intro.html
 
 
===See also===
 
* [[Who decides if software patents exist]]
 
 
 
==Case law==
 
==Case law==
 
===Digital Circuits===
 
===Digital Circuits===
Line 33: Line 22:
 
:''131. W (pat) 31/03, the BGH appears to have some reservations about Sprachananlyseeinrichtung, refusing to extend it to the image processing system of the claim because it was basically a claim to mathematical method as such even though it would implemented by a computer. Most significantly, however, the BGH declined to follow Hitachi (see para 3.2.2.).'''
 
:''131. W (pat) 31/03, the BGH appears to have some reservations about Sprachananlyseeinrichtung, refusing to extend it to the image processing system of the claim because it was basically a claim to mathematical method as such even though it would implemented by a computer. Most significantly, however, the BGH declined to follow Hitachi (see para 3.2.2.).'''
  
===External links===
+
===Judge Mellulis' comments===
  
* [http://eupat.ffii.org/papers/bgh-dispo76/ FFII page about a 1976 BGH decision], which also has a handful of other good links near the top
+
The following are comments made by Judge Mellulis of Germany's Bundesgerichtshof at a Symposium of European Patent Judges in September 2006.  They were quoted in the UK's 2008 ruling on [[Symbian v. Comptroller General (2008, UK)|Symbian v. Comptroller General]].
* [http://eupat.ffii.org/papers/bpatg17-suche02/index.de.html FFII page about the 2002 ruling with "forces of nature"] ([http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=nl&js=y&u=http%3A%2F%2Feupat.ffii.org%2Fpapers%2Fbpatg17-suche02%2Findex.de.html&sl=de&tl=en&history_state0= Google translation to English])
+
 
* [http://www.ffii.de/wiki/FallVistaPrint FFII wiki about the Vistaprint case] ([http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=nl&js=y&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ffii.de%2Fwiki%2FFallVistaPrint&sl=de&tl=en&history_state0= Google translation to English])
+
:"''[his court] proceeds from the assumption that the prohibition on the patenting of software 'as such' means what the law says ... software is not patentable merely by virtue of being used in conjunction with a general-purpose computer''"
* [http://www.ffii.de/wiki/Urteile FFII wiki listing software patent cases, most in German courts] ([http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=nl&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ffii.de%2Fwiki%2FUrteile Google translation to English])
+
 
 +
Deprecating the reliance on the word "technical", he noted:
 +
 
 +
:"''when assessing software as such, the program's interdependence with the technical device makes the technical content hard to deny''"
  
 
==External links==
 
==External links==
 +
 
* http://www.dpma.de - Germany's patent office
 
* http://www.dpma.de - Germany's patent office
 
* [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=240205 Software Patents in Germany], Stefan Bechtold, July 2000
 
* [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=240205 Software Patents in Germany], Stefan Bechtold, July 2000
Line 48: Line 41:
 
* [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/07/patent_crackdown_at_cebit/ 180 German police perform raid regarding software patents]
 
* [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/07/patent_crackdown_at_cebit/ 180 German police perform raid regarding software patents]
 
* [http://eupat.ffii.org/gasnu/de/index.en.html FFII's page on swpats in Germany]
 
* [http://eupat.ffii.org/gasnu/de/index.en.html FFII's page on swpats in Germany]
 +
* http://www.esr-pollmeier.de/swpat/intro.html
  
 +
===[[FFII]] pages===
  
 +
* [http://eupat.ffii.org/papers/bgh-dispo76/ FFII page about a 1976 BGH decision], which also has a handful of other good links near the top
 +
* [http://eupat.ffii.org/papers/bpatg17-suche02/index.de.html FFII page about the 2002 ruling with "forces of nature"] ([http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=nl&js=y&u=http%3A%2F%2Feupat.ffii.org%2Fpapers%2Fbpatg17-suche02%2Findex.de.html&sl=de&tl=en&history_state0= Google translation to English])
 +
* [http://www.ffii.de/wiki/FallVistaPrint FFII wiki about the Vistaprint case] ([http://translate.google.com/translate?prev=hp&hl=nl&js=y&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ffii.de%2Fwiki%2FFallVistaPrint&sl=de&tl=en&history_state0= Google translation to English])
 +
* [http://www.ffii.de/wiki/Urteile FFII wiki listing software patent cases, most in German courts] ([http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=nl&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ffii.de%2Fwiki%2FUrteile Google translation to English])
 +
 +
 +
{{page footer}}
 
[[Category:Germany]]
 
[[Category:Germany]]
 
[[Category:Countries and regions]]
 
[[Category:Countries and regions]]
Line 55: Line 57:
 
[[Category:Case law by region]]
 
[[Category:Case law by region]]
 
[[Category:EPC signatories with relevant subject matter case law|Germany, Case law in]]
 
[[Category:EPC signatories with relevant subject matter case law|Germany, Case law in]]
{{page footer}}
 

Revision as of 20:09, 11 October 2009

country-region-todo

Case law

Digital Circuits

This important ruling introduced the test of "controllable natural forces".

This legal wording was used in the EU by the anti-swpat campaign in September 2003.

UK's Lord Justice Jacobs' comments

The UK 2006 Aerotel v. Telco ruling, page 49, notes:

"129. Two cases of the German BGH were brought to our attention. The first was Sprachananlyseeinrichtung (language analysing device) 11th May 220 X ZB 15/86 GRUR 200 1007, 454 OJ EPO 8-9/2002. The headnote accurately states the holding:
“(a)An apparatus (computer) which is programmed in a specific way has technical character. The applies even if texts are edited on the computer.
(b) For the purpose of assessing the technical character of such an apparatus it is not relevant whether the apparatus produces a (further) technical effect, whether technology is enriched by it or whether it makes a contribution to the state of the art.”
130. For reasons we confess we do not fully understand the BGH considered that the case was not concerned with the computer program as such exclusion. It therefore did not find it necessary to consider the EPO case law on the point. Significantly, in the more recent case of Jesco Schwarzer 28th September 2004 17
131. W (pat) 31/03, the BGH appears to have some reservations about Sprachananlyseeinrichtung, refusing to extend it to the image processing system of the claim because it was basically a claim to mathematical method as such even though it would implemented by a computer. Most significantly, however, the BGH declined to follow Hitachi (see para 3.2.2.).'

Judge Mellulis' comments

The following are comments made by Judge Mellulis of Germany's Bundesgerichtshof at a Symposium of European Patent Judges in September 2006. They were quoted in the UK's 2008 ruling on Symbian v. Comptroller General.

"[his court] proceeds from the assumption that the prohibition on the patenting of software 'as such' means what the law says ... software is not patentable merely by virtue of being used in conjunction with a general-purpose computer"

Deprecating the reliance on the word "technical", he noted:

"when assessing software as such, the program's interdependence with the technical device makes the technical content hard to deny"

External links

FFII pages