ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

Difference between revisions of "Patent lawyers"

(Related pages on {{SITENAME}})
m (Reverted edits by 91.143.62.161 (Talk) to last revision by Ciaran)
Line 17: Line 17:
 
</blockquote>
 
</blockquote>
  
mkEpgt  <a href="http://nvhqgcmrxvrf.com/">nvhqgcmrxvrf</a>, [url=http://wcypoyqhotzh.com/]wcypoyqhotzh[/url], [link=http://qckporzqxapv.com/]qckporzqxapv[/link], http://idiwsojzngak.com/
+
==Related pages on {{SITENAME}}==
 +
* [[Which sectors are for and against]]?
 +
* [[Dan Ravicher]] a patent lawyer that campaigns ''against'' software patents
  
 
==External links==
 
==External links==

Revision as of 21:32, 29 May 2010

For most patent lawyers specialised in software, the patentability of software ideas is essential for the existence of their jobs. Their input is very valuable because they are experts in the field, but their financial interest in the pro-software-patent side of the debate must be kept in mind.

Lord Justice Jacob said in his ruling on the 2006 UK case Aerotel v. Telco:

"If the encouragement of patenting and of patent litigation as industries in themselves were a purpose of the patent system, then the case for construing the [exclusion] categories narrowly (and indeed for removing them) is made out."

Support exceptionally high among patent lawyers

When the European Commission held its Consultation Paper on the Patentability of Computer-Implemented Inventions in 2000, 6% of replies were in favour of software patents, but among respondents who identified themselves as "IP professionals", that rate was 77%.

Mentality

This is just a quote from one patent attorney, but it may explain the mentality of many:

Whether anyone likes it or not, regardless of the outcome of Bilski at the Supreme Court software will remain patentable. Patent attorneys have always been at least one step ahead, and even if the Supreme Court tries to kill software patents we will figure out a way to characterize it so that it will be patentable.[1]

Related pages on ESP Wiki

External links

  • http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2010/01/06/the-fundamental-unfairness-of-retroactively-applying-bilski/