descr: An diesem ersten Tag einer zweitägigen interdisziplinären Konferenz in Brüssel am und im Europäischen Parlament bringen wir Programmierer, Ingenieure, Unternehmer, Juristen, Ökonomen und Politiker zusammen, um die gesamte Kausalkette zwischen vorgeschlagenen Patentierbarkeitsregeln und politischen Zielen und Werten der Europäischen Union wie z.B. Innovation, Wettbewerb, schlanke Verwaltung, Rechtssicherheit, IT-Sicherheit, E-Europa, E-Inklusion, und %(q:bis 2010 die wettbewerbsfähigste Informationsgesellschaft der Welt werden). title: 2003/05/07 BXL: Vom Juristischen Wortspiel zu Erteilten Softwarepatenten mnl: Zeit und Ort ncg: Konferenzprogramm tim: Zeit eea: Mittwoch pla: Ort ipl: Nähe Eur. Kommission, 5-10 Gehminuten vom Europäischen Parlament feW: Eine Karte mit Wegbeschreibung findet sich auf dem %(aw:AEL-Wiki). sra: Simultandolmetschen ist wenigstens für %(LST) verfügbar Wlm: Allerlei Projektoren, einschließlich Multimedia-Projektor (Beamer) stehen zur Verfügung. hom: wer? enn: Software Patents -- The U.S. as a Test Case eia: Keynote Speech: Learning from American Mistakes eri: The %(fh:hearings held by the U.S. competition agencies) paint a darker picture of U.S. practice than the report than the report on which the Commission relies, and the Undersecretary for Intellectual Property has described the Patent Office as an agency in crisis. What can Europe learn from the U.S. experience? ons: Co-Panelists auW: Professor for Information Policy Studies, Univ. of Michigan ttL: Bürgerrechte unter Überlappenden Eigentumssystemen rdu: Some companies have used patents to obtain broad exclusion scopes which copyright denied them. Some are using patents to make their competitors, copyright property useless. Proponents of the directive say that %(q:patents and copyright are complementary and may overlap), whereas earlier doctrines called for a clear separation of spheres of property. How has such overlapping worked in semiconductor topography and areas? Will the broadest property right always win out? Are civil liberties crushed under a broadness competition? How can an integrated system of intellectual/industrial be (re)created? tWt: patent examiner at %(dc:German Patent office) neempl: spricht nur für sich selbst, nicht für seinen Arbeitgeber ter: Patente und Europas Rechtsstruktur Wte: With the challenges facing the European and global patent system(s), how should decisions on software and business methods be made? And by whom? iol: What can a EU directive achieve in the context of concurrence between inter-governmental treaties and EU Law? frw: author of a %(es:EU-sponsored study) on software patents yei: German attorney and writer of much-cited articles, coiner of the term %(q:confusion by clarification) noW: spricht nur für sich selbst, nicht für seinen Arbeitgeber WrW: IP expert of ELDR sWc: author of JURI amendment 72, which %(e:calls on the commission to withdraw the directive) because %(e:the fact that the European Patent Convention and Community legislation exist alongside each other makes the current legal rules concerning the granting of patents unnecessarily confusing.) Lun: Buffet atl: Invention Concepts in Europe and the Resulting Patents rtn: Did the European Patent Office really grant software patents %(q:from its earliest days), as MEP Arlene McCarthy says in her report? What were the original standards of the EPC and how did the EPO change them from 1973 to 2003? jdo: Were the changes motivated by evoltion of technology or by internal political evolutions of the patent system? How many patents of which types were granted as a result? Were the changes gradual or were there major leaps and revolutions? lrn: Was the EPO an innovator or a follower? How do national practises in Europe differ? Is the EPO violating Art 52 EPC? Is there a way back, or would that lead to %(q:irreconcilable conflicts with the EPO), as MEP McCarthy says? pea: What options does the European Parliament have today for defining what is a patentable invention and what not? lWV: Justiziar des %(LV)s ffW: drafter of %(es:Opinion of the Economic and Social Council of the EU) on the Directive Proposal aWb: Entwicklungen in der Patentierungspraxis ost: Thickets, Holdup, Ambush, Broadcast Litigation, Contract Clauses. Who benefits and who loses? ikr: Subsidizing Failure? -- Patents after the Bust tnn: Softwareunternehmer oee2: Kaffee nWi: IT Infrastructure Patents and the Information Society gaW: The path of operating system kernel development is cluttered with patents. What kind of services and applications have been affected so far? eoW: Yesterday's Innovators Locking In Tomorrow's Innovation? aht: Alcatel's proclaimed strategy of patenting the %(q:Next Generation Internet) and the consequences of a possible domination of software by patent-oriented hardware industries. otr: Microsoft's Patenting Strategies Wsc: As patent numbers increase and patent quality decreases, is the noose around Free OS Development becoming tighter or looser? anm: E-Patents and E-Commerce aao: The directive proponents seem to consider advancements in database, groupware, enterprise ressource planning etc to be patentable inventions but distance themselves from %(q:pure business method patents). Can such a distinction prevent the worst in Europe? ieb: Recently various E-Commerce companies, not all of which develop software, have been attacked with E-Patents in the US. In many cases, equivalent patents have been granted in Europe and would become enforcible under the proposed directive. How would E-Commerce be affected? jWm: subject to confirmation Dne: Abendessen kyr: Die %(ak:Wissenschaftliche Konferenz) geht am folgenden Tag (Donnerstag) um 15.00 weiter. Am Donnerstag morgen 9.00 gibt es eine %(eh:Parlamentarische Anhörung) und um 13.00 eine %(sg:Straßenaufführung) zum Thema, siehe %(eo:Gesamtübersicht der Veranstaltung). # Local Variables: ; # coding: utf-8 ; # srcfile: /ul/prg/src/mlht/app/swpat/swpatpenmi.el ; # mailto: mlhtimport@a2e.de ; # passwd: XXXX ; # feature: swpatdir ; # dok: swpparl0357 ; # txtlang: de ; # End: ;