ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!

Difference between revisions of "Patent lawyers"

("''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 ind)
Line 1: Line 1:
Many '''patent lawyers''' make money by filing patents and bringing software developers to courtIt's generally in their financial interest to say that software patents are and should be valid.
+
For most '''patent lawyers''' specialised in software, the patentability of software ideas is essential for the existence of their jobsTheir input is very valuable because they are experts in the field, but '''their financial interest in the pro-[[software patents|software-patent]] side of the debate must be kept in mind'''.
  
==Is support for software patents exceptionally high among patent lawyers?==
+
Lord Justice Jacob said in his ruling on the [[UK]] case [[Aerotel v. Telco (2006, UK)|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 66%.
 
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 66%.

Revision as of 23:35, 20 September 2009

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 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 66%.

Related pages on ESP Wiki