The directive was initially proposed by the European Commission as a way to codify and harmonise the controversial habit of the European Patent Office of granting software patents under the European Patent Convention. The directive also took on the role of excluding "business methods" from patentability (in contrast with the situation under US law), because there were no strong lobby groups in favour of them.
But the directive catalysed an organised campaign by diverse opponents of software patents, who disagreed with the claims of the patent establishment that software patents were economically desirable or required under international law. The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure and the Eurolinux Alliance played key roles in co-ordinating this campign.
In September 2003, the European Parliament finally passed the directive, in a heavily ammended form, which would place significant limits on the patentability of software. The most significant changes included: a definition of the "technicity" requirement for patentability which distinguishes between abstract information-processing processes and specific kinds of physical processes (only the latter are "technical"); and a blanket rule that patents cannot be used to prevent interoperability between computer systems.
The Parliament's amendments were a major defeat for the directive's original proponents, and it remains to be seen how the Council of Ministers and the European Commission treat the ammended proposal. Being essentially comprised of governments, rather than elected parliamentarians, the Council is likely to be more insulated from the grassroots activism of the capaign for limits on patentiability, and more atuned to the position of organisations such as the Business Software Alliance, than the Parliament was. Letter writing campaigns, coalition building and reinforcement of the scholarly case against unlimited patentability, may nonethless "trickle up" through governments to the Council.
External Links