|Reactions||Tauss+Kelber 03-09-24||BMJ 03-09-26||AIPLA 03-10-06||Nokia|
The wording of this draft further implies a breach of the GATT/TRIPS-Treaty since software technology would be excluded from patent protection. A recital confirming the GATT/TRIPS-Treaty (Original Recital 6) has been deleted by the Parliament.
The amended directive implies no breach of TRIPs. On the contrary, it bases the exclusion of software patents on the doctrine that technical inventing is closely related to the use of forces of nature and that data processing is not a field of technology in the sense of Art 27 TRIPs. This doctrine pervades the directive as amended by the Parliament. It is stated explicitely in several of its articles and recitals. Thus the original recital 6 has been rendered redundant.
As to the amendments themselves, to me the most onerous are 32 (which is just incorrect); 95 (which would put the EPO out of business); 84; all of the amendments to Article 2 (36, 42, 117, 107, 69, 55rev, 97, 108, 38, 44 and 118) (which would negate any software related invention); 45 (makes no sense when you consider the billions of dollars/euros invested in the financial/banking/stock market and related industries to make those services function); 70; 60; 102 and 111; 72; 103 and 119; 104 and 120; 76 (reworded Article 6a is still destructive of most existing software patents by itself).
My sources on the Commission are trying to determine what to do. They believe the Council will reject this version and send it back to Parliament for a second reading (vote) but the question is whether it can be saved at all. I think our hope is it will either just die or be withdrawn by the Commission.