On Wednesday 02 Jun 2004 17:22, IanBell wrote:

On Wednesday 02 Jun 2004 2:29 pm, Joe Button wrote:

...

Hi

I thought I'd forward a copy of the email I just sent the Eastern MEPs to the list - I was in both a hurry and a blind rage when I wrote it so it's probably not me at my most coherent. Please let me know if there's anything obviously wrong with it.

Seems coherent enough to me but it has one flaw. What you are complaining about, it seems to me, is the granting of an invalid patent because of provable prior art. This situation has always been a possibility with patents and is in no way unique to software.

I did refer to prior art, but I thought I managed to winge about various other things as well, eg. the patenting of the blindingly obvious and the lack of remedy when patents are of dubious validity. Maybe I could have talked about the ways that software is a special case, but you there's only so much you can cram into an MEP's skull in one go.

Really what I was trying to convey was that permitting patents on software created a restrictive and uncertain environment for businesses, in the hope of undermining the pro-unamended text lobby's position that it will increase clarity.

Thanks for describing me as 'coherent' - I think that's probably the nicest thing anyone's ever said about me.

Joe x