On Wednesday 11 August 2010 12:05 AM, jtd wrote: > On Tuesday 10 August 2010 16:09:33 Krithika wrote: >> The Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) is filing a pre-grant >> opposition to a software patent application by Microsoft. > > As an adhoc measure too it will wind up as agreeing in principle to > software patents. The patent law is explicit in not allowing software > patents. The "per se" term is (imo) a qualifier to the next parts > which state that a programmable machine with software does not > qualify.
Slight confusion here; which other next part are you referring to? Section 3(k) of the Patent Act reads: 3) The following are not inventions within the meaning of this Act: (k) a mathematical or business method or computer programme per se or algorithms. > Hence we should be opposing software patents not on terms of prior art > or obviousness, but merely on the grounds of being bad practice by > the patent office. I agree. Hence, the primary ground of opposition is that of being non-patentable, i.e., being "computer programme per se", and not lack of novelty or obviousness. Those are secondary, and are made without prejudice to the primary ground (since one is allowed to use such 'arguendo' arguments). Regards, Pranesh -- Pranesh Prakash Programme Manager Centre for Internet and Society W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ network mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fosscom.in/listinfo.cgi/network-fosscom.in
