Demo København 2004/05

Under pressure from the Danish government, the EU is being pushed to legalise patents on "computer-implemented" algorithms and business methods. The European Parliament voted to confirm the non-patentability of software in September 2003, with support from danish MEPs of various parties, especially the Left, Greens and June Movement. However the Danish government is ignoring the voices of programmers and economists. Instead, the government is allowing officials close to the Danish Patent Office to overthrow the Parliament's decision through a backroom negotiation process in the Council. The Danish government has in the past been one of the drivers of this process. By organising a demonstration, press conference and study conference we want to throw the light of public scrutiny on the questionable backroom dealings of Danish politicians in Brussels and give this subject the weight which it deserves in the upcoming elections to the European Parliament. Targets of the march may include government buildings, patent institutions, party headquarters and headquarters of some of the companies and trade associations that have left their decisions to corporate patent lawyers and allowed them to speak in their name against the interests of Denmark's's software innovators.

Denmark, DKPTO and Software Patents: The Danish government has left patent matters almost completely in the hands of the Danish Patent and Trademark Office (DKPTO), which has been one of the most vigorous promoters of the patent faith and of software patentability in Europe. Their activity includes efforts to rush the CEC/BSA software patentability directive through the Council of the European Union (CEU) and to worsen it by introducing program claims, and publishing "expert opinions" which claim that no innovation would happen without patents and that patents are beneficial even for the development of free/opensource software, placing the Danish EU Presidency of 2002 under the slogan "Growth, Prosperity and Patents" and lobbying for EU subsidies to a proposed insurance for patent owners.
Demo København 2004/05: Under pressure from the Danish government, the EU is being pushed to legalise patents on "computer-implemented" algorithms and business methods. The European Parliament voted to confirm the non-patentability of software in September 2003, with support from danish MEPs of various parties, especially the Left, Greens and June Movement. However the Danish government is ignoring the voices of programmers and economists. Instead, the government is allowing officials close to the Danish Patent Office to overthrow the Parliament's decision through a backroom negotiation process in the Council. The Danish government has in the past been one of the drivers of this process. By organising a demonstration, press conference and study conference we want to throw the light of public scrutiny on the questionable backroom dealings of Danish politicians in Brussels and give this subject the weight which it deserves in the upcoming elections to the European Parliament. Targets of the march may include government buildings, patent institutions, party headquarters and headquarters of some of the companies and trade associations that have left their decisions to corporate patent lawyers and allowed them to speak in their name against the interests of Denmark's's software innovators.
REU/DKPMA 2002/09/23: Änderungsvorschläge zum Softwarepatente-Richtlinienentwurf: The Council of the European Union (CEU) proposes to rewrite some articles of the CEC/BSA proposal of 2002/02/20 in order to take into account various criticisms made by national delegations to the Council's Intellectual Property Working Party, a workgroup consisting of delegates from national patent administrations. This counter-proposal was worked out by the delegates from Denmark, i.e. from the Danish Patent Office (DKPTO), which are presiding over the workgroup during the second half of 2002. The paper is the subject of decision at the Working Party's session on 2002/10/03 in Brussels. We present the paper in tabular comparison with the original CEC/BSA proposal of 2002/02/20. It becomes evident that the DKPTO proposal, while strengthening the rhetorical emphasis on the "technical contribution", creates additional ambiguities and in effect further widens the scope of patentability.