Feeds

Patent Office makes a technical contribution

Workshop findings on the web

  • alert
  • submit to reddit

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

The UK Patent Office has published the findings of its workshops on the European software patents directive. The workshops were arranged to try to involve the technical community in defining how the term "technical contribution" should be interpreted in the UK.

The workshops asked participants to play patent examiner for the day, and to decide whether or not various fictitious inventions ought to be awarded a patent. Neither of the two definitions that have been considered frontrunners proved particularly palatable to the workshop's participants.

Overall, participants felt that the definition in Article 2 of the draft directive is ambiguous and too liberal. But the definition put forward by the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII), was found to be too restrictive, and again, ambiguous. The ambiguity lies in the reference to "controllable forces of nature". Participants felt this was wide open to different interpretations, the Patent Office says.

Patent officials say that this demonstrates the difficulty of coming up with a clear definition, while still keeping within the confines of current UK law.

Sean Dennehey, Director of Patents, said he was grateful to everyone who gave up their time to come along to the workshops. His goal was to find a definition that is easy to apply and which allows patents for computer-implemented technical inventions but blocks patents for non-technical software.

He went on: "The workshops have generated some useful ideas, and I hope they will be taken into account in the imminent debate on the CII Directive at the European Parliament."

"One possible approach seems to be combining a positive statement of what 'technical contribution' means with a negative statement of what it doesn't mean. The draft Directive already does this to some extent because it has a later negative statement in Article 4(2), but we need to look at the wording more carefully."

The full analysis is available here. ®

Related stories

EU takes axe to software patents directive
Software patent directive back in motion
Euro ministers set to OK patent measure

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

More from The Register

next story
Facebook pays INFINITELY MORE UK corp tax than in 2012
Thanks for the £3k, Zuck. Doh! you're IN CREDIT. Guess not
Facebook, Apple: LADIES! Why not FREEZE your EGGS? It's on the company!
No biological clockwatching when you work in Silicon Valley
Happiness economics is bollocks. Oh, UK.gov just adopted it? Er ...
Opportunity doesn't knock; it costs us instead
Sysadmin with EBOLA? Gartner's issued advice to debug your biz
Start hoarding cleaning supplies, analyst firm says, and assume your team will scatter
YARR! Pirates walk the plank: DMCA magnets sink in Google results
Spaffing copyrighted stuff over the web? No search ranking for you
Don't bother telling people if you lose their data, say Euro bods
You read that right – with the proviso that it's encrypted
Apple SILENCES Bose, YANKS headphones from stores
The, er, Beats go on after noise-cancelling spat
prev story

Whitepapers

Cloud and hybrid-cloud data protection for VMware
Learn how quick and easy it is to configure backups and perform restores for VMware environments.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.