Re: A. Horns: FeeFiFoII bomardiert uns ins 19. Jahrhundert
On 26 Feb 2004, at 19:27, Hartmut Pilch wrote:
> Der amerikanische Patentrechercheur G. Aharonian zitiert in seinem
> vielgelesenen Rundschreiben Axel Horns:
>
> It seems to be quite clear that the Council as well as
> the Commission refuse to provide any fixed definition of
> "technicality". This will surely prevent us from being
> bombed back to the world of the nineteenth century as
> intended by the FeeFiFoII but it might render the entire
> Directive fruitless in views of its ultimte goal to provide
> legal certainty. If the Directive should eventually be
> enacted more or less as proposed by the Irish Presidency, I
> expect that the legal disputes before the Patent Offices and
> Courts will continue, fueled by different approaches to the
> concepts of "technology", "technicality", "technical
> contribution", etc.
>
> M.a.W. das lästige Wort "Technik" soll ganz aufgegeben werden, weil
> der Bereich der angewandten Naturwissenschaften heute nicht mehr so
> sehr im Zentrum der wirtschaftlichen Aktivität steht wie noch im 19.
> Jahrhundert?
>
Aeh... falls jemand im Zusammenhang nachlesen will, was ich in meinem
Blog geschrieben habe:
<http://www.ipjur.com/2004_02_01_archive.php3#107729755840839722>
(Warum tut sich FFII immer so schwer, Quellen mit URL zu zitieren?)
Dagegen FFII-inspirierte Definitionsansetze in
<http://register.consilium.eu.int/pdf/en/03/st11/st11503.en03.pdf>
z.B.
"Additionally, to deserve a patent, the technical contribution has to
be new, non-obvious, and susceptible of industrial application."
in Verbindung mit
"(bb) 'industry' within the meaning of patent law means the automated
production of material goods;"
--AHH
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: debate-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: debate-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx