
Logic Patents > Reviews > EuroParl 03-09-24 > Amendments > JURI > Reject > Harmonisation > Not Separate Law
Harmonisation	TRIPs	Patent Eulogy	Copyright	Not Separate Law	Regional Competitiveness

Not a separate body of law

The purpose of the directive is to concretise some general rules of patent law in such a way that adequacy and clarity is achieved for innovations related to computer programs. It is not to create a sui generis software patent law . The patent lobby proposal seems to state this aim in a recital, but fails to achieve it in the directive test. Moreover the recital between the lines suggests that the Parliament's role must be limited to rubberstamping the the European Patent Office's current practise (crypticaly referred to as "current legal position"). The Greens and Lehne try to fix this. Both approaches are OK.

Amendment 242

submitted by:: Evelin Lichtenberger, Monica Frassoni
provision:: rec 18
language:: English
topic:: Not Separate Law

amendment
The legal protection of computer-implemented inventions does not necessitate the creation of a separate body of law in place of the rules of national patent law. The rules of national patent law remain the essential basis for the legal protection of computer-implemented inventions. This Directive simply clarifies the present legal position with a view to securing legal certainty, transparency, and clarity of the law and avoiding any drift towards the patentability of unpatentable methods such as obvious or non-technical procedures and business methods.	The legal protection of computer-assisted inventions does not necessitate the creation of a separate body of law in place of the rules of national patent law. The rules of national patent law remain the essential basis for the legal protection of computer-assisted inventions. This Directive simply clarifies the present legal position with a view to securing legal certainty, transparency, and clarity of the law and avoiding any drift towards the patentability of unpatentable methods, in particular inherently non-technical methods such as algorithms, software, data processing methods or teaching or business methods.
justification
Self-explanatory.

Amendment 244

submitted by:: Tadeusz Zwiefka, Barbara Kudrycka
provision:: rec 19
language:: English
topic:: Not Separate Law

amendment
This Directive should be limited to laying down certain principles as they apply to the patentability of such inventions, such principles being intended in particular to ensure that inventions which belong to a field of technology and make a technical contribution are susceptible of protection, and conversely to ensure that those inventions which do not make a technical contribution are not susceptible of protection.
justification
Similarly to Council recital 13, this amendment claims that there are non-technical inventions. See the justification under the amendment to recital 13 for more information. This was a new recital from the Council.

Amendment 245

submitted by:: Fausto Bertinotti
provision:: rec 19
language:: English
topic:: Not Separate Law

amendment
This Directive should be limited to laying down certain principles as they apply to the patentability of such inventions, such principles being intended in particular to ensure that inventions which belong to a field of technology and make a technical contribution are susceptible of protection, and conversely to ensure that those inventions which do not make a technical contribution are not susceptible of protection.
justification
Similarly to Council recital 13, this amendment claims that there are non-technical inventions. See the justification under the amendment to recital 13 for more information. This was a new recital from the Council.

Amendment 246

submitted by:: Manuel Medina Ortega
provision:: rec 19
topic:: Not Separate Law

amendment
La presente Directiva debe limitarse al establecimiento de determinados principios aplicables a la patentabilidad de este tipo de invenciones. Dichos principios pretenden garantizar que las invenciones que pertenezcan a un campo de la tecnología y aporten una contribución técnica puedan ser objeto de protección y que, por el contrario, aquellas invenciones que no aporten una contribución técnica no lo sean.
justification
Del mismo modo que la enmienda al considerando 13, esta enmienda reivindica que hay invenciones no técnicas.