REFORMING THE NATIONAL PATENT LEGISLATION: POSITIVE CHANGES AND PROBLEMATIC ISSUES

This chapter discusses legal and economic rationale in regards to open source software protection. Software programs are, under TRIPS1, protected by copyright (reference is made to the Berne Convention2). The issue with this protection is that, due to the dichotomy idea/expression that is typical for copyright protection, reverse engineering of software is not excluded, and copyright is hence found to be an insufficient protection. Hence, in the U.S., software makers have increasingly turned to patent protection. In Europe, there is an exclusion of computer programs in Article 52 (2) c) EPC (EPO, 1973), but this exclusion is increasingly narrowed and some call for abandoning the exclusion altogether. A proposal by the European Commission, made in 2002, called for a directive to allow national patent authorities to patent software in a broader way, so as to ensure further against reverse engineering; this proposal, however, was shelved in 2005 over active opposition within and outside the European parliament. In summary, open source software does not fit in any proprietary model; rather, it creates a freedom to operate. Ultimately, there is a need to rethink approaches to property law so as to allow for viable software packaging in both models.

Download Full-text

A Survey of the Principal National Patent Systems

Students Quarterly Journal ◽

10.1049/sqj.1937.0059 ◽

1937 ◽

Vol 8 (29) ◽

pp. 36

Keyword(s):

National Patent ◽

Patent Systems

Download Full-text

Report on the Status of National Patent Strength in 2017 released 2018 training course of patent system and Patent Examination Practicing between the countries along the Belt and Road launched SIPO issued 2017 Research Report of Chinese Patent China fi...

World Patent Information ◽

10.1016/j.wpi.2018.07.005 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 54 ◽

pp. 47-48 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Keyword(s):

Patent System ◽

Research Report ◽

Training Course ◽

The Status ◽

Belt And Road ◽

Chinese Patent ◽

National Patent ◽

Patent Examination ◽

The Belt And Road

Download Full-text

Patents for plants and genes under the European Patent Convention

Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh Section B Biological Sciences ◽

10.1017/s026972700000556x ◽

1992 ◽

Vol 99 (3-4) ◽

pp. 141-152

Author(s):

Noel Byrne

Keyword(s):

Western Europe ◽

Patent Application ◽

Plant Biotechnology ◽

European Patent ◽

European Patent Convention ◽

National Patent ◽

The Cost ◽

Biotechnological Invention ◽

Written Description ◽

Skilled Person

SynopsisThe cost of patenting an invention should be incurred only where the patent is likely to give the inventor an economic or a tactical advantage. Where it is practicable, secrecy may be preferable to patenting. If an advantage from patenting can be envisaged, then in Western Europe the inventor can apply either for a European patent under the European Patent Convention or for a national patent. The inventor in plant biotechnology faces a ban on patenting certain inventions, including plant varieties and essentially biological processes for the production of plants. But since this ban is interpreted strictly, there are opportunities for patenting what at first glance might seem not patentable. A patent application must give a written description of the invention that is complete enough for a skilled person to reproduce it. The inventor may be required to supplement the description in a patent specification for a biotechnological invention, by depositing a sample of relevant biological materials. A European patent is treated as a national patent in the country for which it was granted. Since a patent may be invalidated in enforcement proceedings, patenting may turn out to have been a costly mistake.

Download Full-text