EP software patents FAQ 2005
Q1: This directive is only about Computer Implemented Inventions, not about software. What is the problem?
A1: The European Patent Office examination guidelines: Programs for computers are a form of "computer-implemented invention", an expression intended to cover claims which involve computers, computer networks or other conventional programmable apparatus whereby prima facie the novel features of the claimed invention are realised by means of a program or programs.
Q2: OK, the directive is about software after all. Why should software be excluded from patentability?
A2: The software sector is highly competitive, with low entry costs, countless small players, rapid consequential development and an additional source of innovation: open source. Unlike in other industries, in the software field interoperability is essential. The small players are taxed or kicked out of business, and patenting every little step blocks follow-up development. Interoperability is lost. Patents demolish the characteristics of the software field. Transaction costs go up enormously.
Q3: Europe is strong in automotive industries, gsm, etc. No patents will hurt these strengths. Don't you care?
A3: We do. The FFII made a compromise amendment. By defining technology as applied natural science, anti-lock braking systems (ABS), medical scanners, etc, are patentable.
Q4: 80% of the new jobs in Europe are created by Small and Medium-Sized companies. Don't patents protect SMEs against big companies?
A4: Patents only protect SMEs if the SMEs can be sure not to violate patents themselves. With software this is not the case, on the contrary. Software is full of ideas, software is filling up with patents. Violate one patent, or just being accused of doing so, and you may not be able to sell your product. This will have in the long run a highly deterrent effect on venture capitalists.
Q5: OK, what should I do?
A5: Exclude data processing, define technology as applied natural science. Follow the FFII voting list.
