9780521868396 0521868394 hardback 0511366361 9780511366369 0511495269 9780511495267 0521329620 9780521329620 9780511366994 electronic book 9780511367588 electronic book
Alternate Call Number
G 272 LEI.S
Summary
"The computer program exclusion from Article 52 of the European Patent Convention (EPC) proved impossible to uphold as industry moved over to digital technology, and the Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Organisation (EPO) felt emboldened to circumvent the EPC in Vicom by creating the legal fiction of 'technical effect'. This 'engineer's solution' emphasised that protection should be available for a device, a situation which has led to software and business methods being protected throughout Europe when the form of application, rather than the substance, is acceptable. Since the Article 52 exclusion has effectively vanished, it is timely to reconsider what makes examination of software invention difficult and what leads to such energetic opposition to protecting inventive activity in the software field, Leith advocates a more programming-centre approach, which recognises that software examination requires different strategies from that of other technical fields."--Jacket.
Bibliography, etc. Note
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Formatted Contents Note
1. Software as machine, 2. Software as software, 3. Policy arguments, 4. Software patent examination, 5. Holding the line : algorithms, business methods and other computing ogres, 6. The third way : between patent and copyright? 7. Conclusion : dealing with and harmonising "radical" technologies.
Series
Cambridge intellectual property and information law.
Published
Cambridge, UK : Cambridge University Press, [2007]
"The computer program exclusion from Article 52 of the European Patent Convention (EPC) proved impossible to uphold as industry moved over to digital technology, and the Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Organisation (EPO) felt emboldened to circumvent the EPC in Vicom by creating the legal fiction of 'technical effect'. This 'engineer's solution' emphasised that protection should be available for a device, a situation which has led to software and business methods being protected throughout Europe when the form of application, rather than the substance, is acceptable. Since the Article 52 exclusion has effectively vanished, it is timely to reconsider what makes examination of software invention difficult and what leads to such energetic opposition to protecting inventive activity in the software field, Leith advocates a more programming-centre approach, which recognises that software examination requires different strategies from that of other technical fields."--Jacket.