ESP Wiki is looking for moderators and active contributors!
Difference between revisions of "SAS ruling by EU Court of Justice on 2 May 2012"
(* [www.bristows.com/assets/documents/Opinion%20of%20Advocate%20General%20Bot%20-%20SAS.pdf OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL, delivered on 29 November 2011, Case C-406/10]) |
(The case was referred to the ECJ by the High Court of Justice of England and Wales.) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{navbox}} | {{navbox}} | ||
| − | There is no ruling yet in [[ECJ]] case '''C-406/10''', '''SAS Institute v. World Programing Ltd''', and the case deals with an alleged copyright infringement, not a patent infringement, however, the ECJ's Advocats General (the court's legal advisory body) has made interesting comments. | + | There is no ruling yet in [[ECJ]] case '''C-406/10''', '''SAS Institute v. World Programing Ltd''', and the case deals with an alleged copyright infringement, not a patent infringement, however, the ECJ's Advocats General (the court's legal advisory body) has made interesting comments. The case was referred to the ECJ by the [[High Court of Justice of England and Wales]]. |
==Excerpts with implications for patents== | ==Excerpts with implications for patents== | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
==External links== | ==External links== | ||
| − | * [www.bristows.com/assets/documents/Opinion%20of%20Advocate%20General%20Bot%20-%20SAS.pdf OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL, delivered on 29 November 2011, Case C-406/10] | + | * [http://www.bristows.com/assets/documents/Opinion%20of%20Advocate%20General%20Bot%20-%20SAS.pdf OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL, delivered on 29 November 2011, Case C-406/10] |
* [http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/29/us-court-copyright-sasinstitute-idUSTRE7AS0QO20111129 EU court adviser: copyright doesn't protect software functions], 29 Nov 2011, '''Reuters''' | * [http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/29/us-court-copyright-sasinstitute-idUSTRE7AS0QO20111129 EU court adviser: copyright doesn't protect software functions], 29 Nov 2011, '''Reuters''' | ||
** [http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/11/29/165236/eu-court-adviser-says-software-ideas-cant-be-copyrighted Slashdot discussion] | ** [http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/11/29/165236/eu-court-adviser-says-software-ideas-cant-be-copyrighted Slashdot discussion] | ||
Revision as of 00:36, 30 November 2011
There is no ruling yet in ECJ case C-406/10, SAS Institute v. World Programing Ltd, and the case deals with an alleged copyright infringement, not a patent infringement, however, the ECJ's Advocats General (the court's legal advisory body) has made interesting comments. The case was referred to the ECJ by the High Court of Justice of England and Wales.
Excerpts with implications for patents
57. To accept that a functionality of a computer program can be protected as such would amount to making it possible to monopolise ideas, to the detriment of technological progress and industrial development.
