Re: [FYI] FFII Advisor Dr. Karl-Friedrich Lenz on certain Aspects of Patent Law.
> <http://www.ipjur.com/03.php3>
> <http://www.ipjur.com/2004_03_01_archive.php3#107928689748417100>
>
> FFII Advisor Dr. Karl-Friedrich Lenz on certain Aspects of Patent
> Law.
...
> Mr. Karl-Friedrich Lenz, Law Professor at the Aoyama Gakuin
> University in Tokyo, has decided to provide a comment on my earlier
> posting on the removal of a certain US Patent from the public on-line
> patent database mainatined by the U.S. Patent and Trade Mark Office
> (USPTO). Dr. Lenz writes:
>
> "[...] On the other hand, Axel H. Horns might be right in commenting
> that the basic social contract behind the patent system is granting a
> temporary monopoly in exchange for public information. That would
> mean that the very fundaments of the patent system require that every
> lunatic on the planet is served by the Patent Office with information
> about how to use ricin for the next large scale attack.
>
> That in turn would seem to lead to an excellent argument for
> wholesale abolition of the patent system, if anybody should get
> inclined to call for such abolition, for example as a reaction to the
> mess caused by software patents.
>
> "Look! The patent office is helping terrorists to develop their WMD
> ability! And we can't even stop that without compromising the basic
> social contract the patent system is built on."
Ich kenne den Kontext nicht, könnte mir aber vorstellen, dass es hier um
Art 53 EPÜ (Beschränkungen der Patentierbarkeit aufgrund von
Sittenwidrigkeit / Gefährdung öffentlicher Ordnung) u.ä., einschließlich
Geheimpatente im Falle militärisch relevanter Erfindungen, geht.
Für solche Konflikte gibt es freilich längst Lösungen, die keine
Abschaffung des Patentwesens erfordern, z.B. Geheimpatente im
militärischen Bereich (meist in Kombination mit Zwangslizenzen).
> The above-quoted comments provided by Dr. Lenz are interesting all the
> more as he surely can be seen as an influencial adivsor of Mr. Pilch,
> President of the FFII e.V. So it is not very much surprising that Dr.
> Lenz considers public anxieties against mis-use of technology as a
> "strong argument" to harm the patent system even if he serves some
> lip-service to assure that he is interested in preserving a free
> Internet. Effectively, there are strange parallels between the position
> of this advisor to the FFII e.V. and proposals coming from another side
> as already reported in my earlier posting there.
Welche "andere Seite" ist hier gemeint?
Trotz ihrer Verschrobenheit macht mich diese Diskussion neugierig. Und
mein unterstellter präsidialer Einfluss lässt mich schmunzeln.
--
Hartmut Pilch, FFII e.V. und Eurolinux-Allianz +49-89-18979927
300.000 Stimmen 2000 Firmen gegen Logikpatente http://noepatents.org/
Innovation statt Patentinflation http://swpat.ffii.org/
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: debate-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: debate-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx