#title: Softwarepatente in den USA #descr: Die Patentwelt und Rechtsanwälte insgesamt üben in den USA großen Einfluss aus. Ein japanisches Buch titelt gar %(q:Ein Land prozessiert sich zu Tode -- die Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika). Ähnlich wie in Großbritannien brachen die Schleusen im Hinblick auf Rechenregeln und Software in den USA bereits teilweise in den 70er und gänzlich in den 80er Jahren. In den 80er Jahren wurde dieser Dammbruch dann zu einer Regierungspolitik verbrämt. Einige Politiker sahen in einem verstärkten Patentsystem Möglichkeiten, der bedrohlichen asiatischen Konkurrenz Herr zu werden. Länder wie Japan, Jordanien, aber auch Europa, wurden von der US-Regierung so intensiv bedrängt, dass zeitweilig der französische Präsident von einer strategischen Notwendigkeit sprach, diesem Druck zu widerstehen. Wie viele US-Studien belegen, schadet die Patentinflation auch den USA. Ihr Export dürfte weniger Ausdruck eines nationalen Interesses als eines natürlichen Expansionismus des Patentwesens sein, den man auch in Europa beobachten kann. Allerdings ist kaum zu bezweifeln, dass US-Firmen sich bereits wesentlich gründlicher als europäische auf die Spielregeln der Softwarepatentierung eingestellt haben. Ca 2/3 der vom Europäischen Patentamt (gesetzeswidrig) erteilten Softwarepatente liegen in amerikanischen Händen. Es ist verständlich, wenn amerikanische Unternehmen auf eine baldige Anerkennung dieser Patente in Europa drängen. #cun: A Washington think tank whose leading members occupy high posts in the GW Bush administration and which were advocating many of this administration's policies, including the war on Iraq, already in 1998 and earlier. The website provides interesting reading about a new american sense of mission and and imperial agenda. The patent movement has been able to take advantage of this agenda for its purposes, which are quite unrelated to the US interests as described on this website. #tna: Brian Kahin, a researcher on information policy and former advisor of the Clinton administration on this subject, points that neither Europe nor the US have a policy on where the limits of patentability should be and that yet there are divergences, based on phase differences, at least in legal theory, in the progressive glide toward unlimited patentability, which is why %(orig:the U.S. Government is urging the rest of the world to do away with limits on patentable subject matter in a proposed %(tp|World Intellectual Property Organization|WIPO) treaty on substantive patent law. In May, the U.S. threatened to walk out of negotiations if the treat does not mandate patents for all fields of activity, whether or not they fall within common notions of %(q:technology).) #1fi: WiPO 2003/05/10: US threatens to walk out of WIPO if unlimited patentability is not accepted #qee: Report, 7th Session, WIPO Standing Committee on Patent Law, Geneva, 6-10 May 2002, adopted 25 November 2002 as document SCP/7/8; see paragraphs 159-173, especially the exchange between the European and U.S. delegations at 170-171: %(bc|167. The Delegation of the United States of America also welcomed the reintroduction of the industrial applicability/utility requirement into the Treaty, since utility was an important requirement for the United States of America. The Delegation, however, was of the view that the industrial applicability standards in certain systems might require a claimed invention to have a technical character or technical effect. The Delegation was also concerned that such a provision might also be used to refuse the patenting of inventions that were considered to be private in nature. The Delegation saw no reason to limit patentability in such a manner; the criteria should be that the invention has utility, is novel and involves an inventive step. The Delegation expressed further concern that an %(q:industrial applicability) standard could stifle the development of new areas of innovation, such as software, biotechnology, or other newly developing areas that could not be foreseen now and that might defy definition according to the current understanding of what is meant by %(q:industrial).|171. The Delegation of the United States of America stated that it could support neither a %(q:technical) requirement in the SPLT nor the importation of the very minimal standards of protection that were found in the TRIPS Agreement, nor an %(q:industry) or %(q:industrial-based) standard on the issue of industrial applicability or utility. The Delegation expressed the view that the inclusion of a %(q:technical) or %(q:industrial) requirement would result in the standards for protection for inventions throughout the world to slip backwards, eroding the level of protection for inventors and inventions everywhere. The Delegation was of the opinion that the end result of the discussions, if it were based in part on any of those elements, would not be acceptable to the United States of America, and accordingly, the Delegation might well have to reconsider its participation in those discussions. The Delegation stated that it had come to the negotiations in good faith in that many provisions in the draft SPLT would require fundamental changes to the United States patent system. However, the Delegation stated that its continued participation was contingent on similar good faith from all members of the Committee.) #prt: Naders Kritik an US-Patentexpansionismus #dot: USTR und US-Aktivitäten zu Software-Patenten in Europa #det: USTR und US-Aktivitäten zu Software-Patenten ausserhalb Europas #tWe: IPR Watchlist of the US Trade Representative #Tth: Der U. S. Trade Representative (USTR) und sein Office #oli: Fazit #ksg: Wired 2003-03-11: Nader criticises US policy of exporting patent system #pns: Hier wird berichtet, dass sich der bekannte US-Verbraucherschützer Ralph Nader neuerdings mit Software- und Geschäftsmethoden-Patenten beschäftigt. Er kritisiert speziell, dass die USA über den %(q:US Trade Representative) (USTR) ihr System in Entwicklungsländer exportieren will. #ogW: Letter to USTR Zoellick regarding WTO Patent discussions #Wsa: This letter by Jamie Love of CPTech (Nader's organisation) criticises the activities of the US Trade Representative which are making medicines unaffordable in poor countries and thereby harming overall US foreign policy objectives and lowering the standing of the US in the international community. The letter also mentions that, while the US is making compulsory licensing difficult to implement for poor countries, it has itself not been hesitant to impose compulsory zero-fee licensing of Mexican and Canadian Software Patents, as seen from the %(q:2001-09-26 Federal Register notice regarding United States v. 3D Systems Corporation and DTM Corporation). #iWi: In its annual report on its european activities, the US Trade Representative writes: %(bc:Most U.S. businesses also support European Commission efforts to launch a proposal for an EU software patent. However, internal Commission disagreement has blocked progress on this project.) #heW: Europa und Japan gehören aber auch zu den Zielen des USTR, das belegt die USTR-Website. Sie zeigt u. a., dass ein EU-Richtlinienvorschlag laut USTR bereits %(e:vor) seiner Veröffentlichung von vielen US-Unternehmen unterstützt wurde. #ecW: Da wird sich der USTR gefreut haben, als im Februar 2002 der %(er:EU-Richtlinienvorschlag) schließlich doch erschienen ist. Aber der USTR hat sich nicht erst 2001 mit dem Thema beschäftigt. In seinen Berichten 2000 und 1999 schreibt er: #etl2: Under the heading %(q:Foreign Trade Barriers) the USTR states: %(bc:In addition, the [European] Commission believes ... that EU law on patentability of computer programs and software related inventions must be brought into line with the United States and Japan. ... A series of concrete measures to improve the framework for obtaining patent protection in the EU ... include ... a proposal for a Directive on patent protection of inventions related to computer programs.) #dvr2: US Trade Representative Report on Europe 1999 #etl: Under %(q:Foreign Trade Barrier) the report reports encouragingly about extensions of patentability, taking for granted that such extensions are good for U.S. firms: %(bc:In addition, the [European] Commission believes ... that EU law on patentability of computer programs and software related inventions must be brought into line with the United States and Japan. ... On June 16, 1998, after years of debate, the European Council adopted a directive on legal protection of biotechnological inventions. ... The directive excludes plant and animal varieties from patentability and, although a positive development for U.S. firms, will not provide the same level of patent protection that is provided in the United States to biotechnological inventions.) #cse: Insofern ist Skepsis angebracht, wenn die EU-Kommission behauptet, dass der EU-Richtlinienvorschlag %(q:amerikanische Verhältnisse) verhindern solle und %(q:nur) bereits vorhandenes Recht harmonisiere. #rcW: Es ist auf der USTR-Website gut dokumentiert, dass der USTR über all die Jahre gut informiert war und US-Unternehmen den EU-Richtlinien-Vorschlag bereits vor seiner Veröffentlichung unterstützt haben. US-Unternehmen wie Microsoft begrüßen den Richtlinienvorschlag der EU-Kommission ausdrücklich. #rrw: In summer 2003, when it became apparent that the European Parliament was no longer under complete control of the software patent lobby, the US Representation at the EU forwarded a document, apparently written by someone in the US Patent Office, to put pressure on the European Parliament. From this document it became apparent that the USTR supported the Commission's approach and considered it basically equivalent to the US rules for software and business method patents, with differences in wording accepted as a means of overcoming political resistance, as long as these differences remained only rhetorical. #Usi: Die Aktivitäten der USA in Europa stehen nicht alleine. Das Büro des USTR kümmert sich in diesem Zusammenhang um viele große und kleine Länder. #Wgd: In einem %(q:Fact Sheet) zu einem %(q:Information Technology Expert Level Meeting) zwischen den USA und Japan vom 2. März 2001 wird auf der Website des USTR festgehalten: #ntW: US-JP %(q:Information-Technology Expert-Level Meeting) 2001-03-02 %(q:Fact Sheet) #nss: This memorandum of a meeting of US Trade Representatives with Japanese Colleagues states %(bc:Intellectual Property: Robust intellectual property protection is essential to the growth of e-commerce. The United States urged the Japanese Government to take a number of measures in this area, including: ... protecting business method patents.) #nxl: Auch kleine Länder werden von den USA softwarepatentmäßig umsorgt, so findet sich in einem %(q:Memorandum of Understanding) zwischen den USA und Jordanien vom 24. Oktober 2000 auf der Website des USTR: #nge: US-Jordan Memorandum of Understanding 2000-10-24 obliges Jordan to make software and business methods patentable #rdb: The Memorandum stipulates %(bc:5. Jordan shall take all steps necessary to clarify that the exclusion from patent protection of %(q:mathematical methods) in Article 4B of Jordan's Patent Law does not include such %(q:methods) as business methods or computer-related inventions.) #Tre: USTR - Press Release #hnr: Statement of the US Trade Representative accompanying the publication of the %(q:Priority Watch List). #eWo: USTR - Intellectual Property - 2003 Special 301 Report - Priority Watch List #nmn: List of countries which are causing special grief to the right-holders in the USA and require special monitoring and pressure by the US Trade Repressentative. This list contains the EU. The EU has a conflict with the US on the regime for geographical indications (such as %(q:Budweiser), %(q:Champagne)) and its relation to trademarks. Moreover, according to the USTR, some EU member states are failing to implement the EU biotech patent directive, i.e. providing insufficient %(q:protection) for gene patents. It is to be expected that the USTR will, in response to complaints from patent lawyer organisations such as AIPLA, list the European Parliament's vote against software patentability of 2003-09-24 on next year's list of griefs for which the EU deserves to be %(q:watched) with priority. #4lW: USTR 2004-01: South Korea elevated to Priority Watch List #Wtf: The USTR reports failures of South Korean authorities to comply with their commitments to enforce digital copyright. #0sR: IIPA 2003/05: Copyright Industries Support the US Trade Representative #nWW: An association of 5 associations of information producing companies welcome the USTR efforts to monitor enforcement of copyright in foreign countries and request the addition of further countries to the %(q:Priority Watch List). Associations such as IIPA seem to be major sources for the Watch Lists drawn up by the USTR. #cWn: website of the US Trade Representative #fWe: Role of the US Trade Representative (USTR) #TPc: USTR IP Sector #row: The US Trade Representative has special staff to work on %(q:Intellectual Property) issues, which includes patents. #cWe: USTR 1997: Building American Prosperity in the 21st Century - U.S. Trade and Investment in the Asia Pacific Region #eiW: Under the heading %(q:Impact of the Information Age ...) the following policy is formulated: %(bc|The United States must adopt policies and practices based on the following imperatives:|...|5. As vigorously as the United States would protect its most precious natural resources, America must have strong, reliable intellectual property protection and make this issue a high priority in all international trade fora.) #rWn: Der U.S. Trade Representative USTR ist Berater, Unterhändler und Sprecher des US-Präsidenten in Handelsfragen: #sSg: Ein spezielles Arbeitsgebiet (Sector) des USTR ist %(q:geistiges Eigentum) und dort Patente: #WWa: In einem Bericht von 1997 auf der Website des USTR wird als Leitlinie der Politik der US-Regierung formuliert, dass der %(q:Schutz des Geistigen Eigentums) zu einem Anliegen höchster Priorität in allen internationalen Foren gemacht werden soll: #rsW: Man überinterpretiert die US-Politik wohl kaum, wenn man festhält, dass beim USTR Software-Patente und Geschäftsmethoden-Patente nach US-amerikanischem Recht mit Bodenschätzen gleichgesetzt werden und dass die weltweite Verbreitung des entsprechenden US-Rechtssystems ein vornehmes Ziel der US-Handelspolitik ist. #rOW: Wichtiges USPTO Paper von 94/95 #AWn: A latecomer to the %(ec:EU Commission's consultation exercise), in which many patent lawyers wearing the hat of large US companies participated and spoke in the same sense as this document. #rmW: Vice President Al Gore says E-Commerce needs Patents #rvd: FICPI, world association of patent lawyers, calls for removal of all means of restricting patentability by interpreting words such as %(q:technical), %(q:industrial), %(q:inventions) from TRIPs and upcoming treaties such as SPLT. FICPI is allied with the US government on this point. One could also say that the US government has been hijacked by patent lawyers. #ACf: The American Chamber of Commerce participated in the European Commission's consultation by submitting this paper which supports the EU directive proposal and hails it for bringing Europe closer to the US model which it finds just fine. #LiW: Like that of other patent offices, thes USPTO website is full of self-serving propaganda, displays very little spirit of objectivity as far as the effects of patents are concerned. #Cos: CPTech: US obliges Japan and Jordan to legalise business method patents #2eW: 2001-03-02: a meeting between %(q:United States and Japanese government officials) focused on %(q:U.S. proposals to promote a more information-technology (IT) friendly regulatory environment in Japan). According to a US-side %(q:fact sheet), %(bc:The United States urged the Japanese Government to take a number of measures in this area, including ... clarifying its laws to ensure that the personal use exception for copying is not abused in the digital environment; and protecting business method patents.) #2nW: 2000-10-24: Memorandum of Understanding on Issues Related to the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights Under the %(ft:Agreement Between the United States and Jordan on the Establishment of a Free Trade Area). The MoU contains the following provision: %(bc:Jordan shall take all steps necessary to clarify that the exclusion from patent protection of 'mathematical methods' in Article 4B of Jordan's Patent Law does not include such methods as business methods or computer-related inventions.) #psi: The explanatory memorandum of the directive proposal cites BSA studies which are unrelated to software patents but also appear in the reasoning of software patent advocacy papers transmitted by the US Representation in Brussels. The directive draft itself was at least partially written by an employee of BSA, a US-based organisation dominated by Microsoft. #TpW: The %(VL) news service frequently takes up the subject of software patents partly because it is concerned with asserting latin/romanic culture against the perceived dominance of anglo-american culture. #AwW: A well known american (patent) law office had the following statement on their web pages as of 2002/03/13: #Ouo: Our practice has allowed us to build up close contacts with key officials in the European Commission's Competition Directorate-General, including the case-handlers who administer the files and the policy makers at all levels of the administration. This enables us to ensure that policy decisions in individual cases are not taken without our clients' concerns having been expressed and considered at the appropriate level. #WWt: Which is to be put in relation to %(ip:another page of theirs): #Tte: The attorneys in our Brussels office provide clients with the most up-to-date information on the policies and regulations of the European Community with respect to intellectual property matters, including standardization of practices among the EU nations. #Wtt: Well, no lie, if they're so close to EC executives... #ego: These pages were later removed or moved to areas which are accessible only to clients. But you can find a lot of other pages on the current site which show that Oppenheimer's lawyers are still in regular close contact with the political scene in Brussels and elsewhere in Europe. #grn: It is so far unclear to us whether Oppenheimer LLP, %(OF), A.M. Oppenheimer and others share more than the name. Some of these are highly active in telecommunications and i.a. largest foreign shareholder of Ericsson, owning 215 million B-shares. Oppenheimer is a famous jewish business dynasty originating in Germany. Robert S. Oppenheimer was a legendary jewish businessman and politician who, after a change in political power, fell victim to judicial murder in Wuerttemberg 300 years ago. #CWi: CIA und Patentinflation #CtW: Cites the Church Commission's report on CIA activities to demonstrate that the CIA is active in covert opinion making on various issues believed to be %(q:strategic). #Ats: All French Parties/Candidates against Software Patents #Cbt: Chirac is not the only French politician to worry about software patents being used as a strategic instrument against European technological independence #foo: further detailed explanations about the US Jordan FTA from James Love, project director of CPTech. Mainly concerned with the effects on pharma patents. #AWW: An FAQ-like explanation of the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA) policy, including its impact on patent policies. #aWl: a call for action against the US government's policy of pushing IP related policies into free trade agreements #Wae: At WIPO the US government, represented by its patent office, is obstructing all discussions about the efficiency of the patent system in promoting innovation. In 2003/08 the US representative asked that a WIPO movement on implications of opensource software for the IPR system should be cancelled, because %(q:it is WIPO's job to uphold and extend property rights, not to restrict or waive them). See also the ensuing discussion. #mrh: The Intellectual Property Committee's primary objective is to focus on intellectual property matters as they relate to the IEEE-USA membership (employed engineers, faculty, scientists, inventors, entrepreneurs, etc.), fast moving technology, technology transfer, and U.S. competitiveness. #neS: IPC prepares testimony and position statements, drafts legislation, and delivers expert testimony before the U.S. Congress and the United States Patent and Trademark Office. #let: At OECD in Paris 2003/08/28, the US government, representat by patent officials, asked the scientists and politicians assembled at the conference to refrain from discussing %(q:so-called problems of the patent system). The US representative said: patents are basically good, the system has worked for 200 years, and any attempt to discuss its so-called problems will only be taken as a pretext by some third-world-ideologues to stir up artificial problems. In contrast, the EPO representatives at the conference seemed very intelligent and enlightened, although (or because) they were not speaking in the name of any government. #dse: KONNO Hiroshi, an authority on industry-applied mathematics in Japan, reports about his decade-long fight against the introduction of math patents in Japan and about the role of the US in generating political pressure for this change. #ifh: One of the leading software patent evangelists at the European Commission cites the US example and misrepresents the decisions that led to software patentability in the US. This review gives an overview of the development in the US and illustrates how this has been (ab)used for patent advocacy in Brussels. #nyw: major US opposition group against software patents #ena: Research on Innovation #ler: A group of social scientists who have been studying the evolution of the patent system and writing critcical papers #chW: Subscribe to the %(c:us) project #dow: Provide addresses of people to write to #hxh: Edit the %(we:Wiki Extension) of this page. #oWW: Write to your political representatives in the US #oWf: Ask them to question the IPR evangelism activities of the US Trade Representative and the US Patent Office and in particular to #mna: stop promotion of software and business method patentability #otT: stop promotion of extensive interpretations of the TRIPs treaty #tco: stop promotion of US patentability criteria through the proposed SPLT treaty #hoe: publish a statement which makes it clear that the US government has no objections against the European Parliament's amended software patent directive. # Local Variables: ; # coding: utf-8 ; # srcfile: /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp/phm/sys/mlht.el ; # mailto: mlhtimport@ffii.org ; # login: phm ; # passwd: YYYYY ; # feature: swpatdir ; # dok: swpatus ; # txtlang: de ; # multlin: t ; # End: ;