|
![]() |
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Softwarepatent of the Month – June The "software patent of the month June " has been elected. Thank you for your participation!Below are the results:
Total votes: 1488 The patents stated above were granted on 1 June 2005. They are the final five software patents granted on 1 Juni 2005 according to the chronological order quoted by gauss.ffii.org. Again the selection was deliberately coincidental. Please judge yourself, whether these patents overtop the negative examples presented in May.The fact that four of five proprietors of these EU-patents have their headquarters in Japan or the USA is coincidental – however this cannot surprise as approximately 70 percent of all the European software patents are owned by Japanese or US-American companies. Positive examples wanted! Time and time again it is claimed that our examples of software patents are "gaffes"; it is further stated that most of the software patents deserve protection rights for "inventions", which would not have been made without the prospect of 20 years of protection through monopolies. We want to present such "positive" examples in the coming election and to provide an impartial view on the negative and presumed positive aspects of software patents for our readers. Perhaps you know a software patent, which you feel convinced to be
patent of quality? Or you know one which was awarded with a price of
innovation? Please send us information about your candidates of high value software patents!
|
|