FFII

COVID-19 tracing apps threatened by Blyncsy software patent

By |

COVID tracing apps are now under the threat of a software patent in the United States, granted to Blyncsy, a company from Utah. This is the posterchild of an American patent office willfully ignoring the Alice jurisprudence of the Supreme Court, which bans patents on software. Blyncsy was granted a patent on February 2019 titled “Tracking proximity releationships and uses thereof” (US10198779B2), which claims “receiving data about a first person and a second person, the first person having a contagion.” US10198779B2: Tracking proximity releationships and uses thereof

Blyncsy has opened up a new webpage for collecting royalties, signaling their intention to actively racket other players around this broad and trivial software patent. Their CEO Mark Pittman said:

“We have launched the website to streamline the process to make licensing easier.

FFII

Unified Patent Court halt sales of ventilators across Europe

By |

Brussels, 1st April 2020 — The Unified Patent Court (UPC) has issued a pan-European injunction to halt the sales of ventilators across Europe. The Court ruled that ventilators used by hospitals in the current pandemic of COVID-19 were violating an EPO patent on graphical user interfaces using tabs, granted to Bulldog Diagnostics LLC. Despite the lockdown, crowds started assembling around EPO offices, and the protests quickly escalated into violent riots. Protesters said that patent law cannot live in its own bubble, that lives were more important than profit. An OES CYGNUS Anaesthesia Ventilator using tabs (ref: https://www.oes-medical.co.uk/cygnus/ )

EPO patent EP 689133 on Tabbed panels
James Live, of Ecologic International: “Halting sales of life-saving devices in a middle of a pandemic is a criminal act.

FFII

EU Software Patent Court stopped by Constitutional Court, patent industry will try again

By |

Brussels, 23 March 2020 — The third attempt to validate software patents in Europe via a central patent court (UPC) has been stopped by the German Constitutional Court. The Unified Patent Court (UPC) would have given the keys of the kingdoms to the patent industry, and the last word over software patentability. FFII predict that the patent industry will continue to push for an UPC v2.0. The Unitary Patent was the third attempt to validate software patents in Europe. Software patents are a danger for small companies that cannot afford defense, especially against patent trolls.

FFII

Pourquoi faut-il rejeter le Brevet Unitaire?

By |

Le Brevet Unitaire est la troisième tentative de valider les brevets logiciels en Europe. Les Brevets Logiciels sont des dangers pour les petites entreprises du secteur, qui ne peuvent se défendre. La Cour UPC est une cour internationale captive située au dehors de l’Union Européenne et de la Cour de Justice de l’Union Européenne, et qui aura le dernier mot sur la question des brevets logiciels. La Cour UPC favorisera les “trolls des brevets” qui volent nos emplois. 1.

FFII

Germany can no longer ratify the Unitary Patent due to Brexit and the established AETR case-law, says FFII

By |

PRESS RELEASE — [ Europe / Brexit / Patent / Democracy / Economy / Software ]
Berlin, 19 feb 2020 — Germany cannot ratify the current Unitary Patent due to Brexit and the established AETR case-law. The ratification of the UPC (Unified Patent Court) by Germany would constitute a violation of the AETR case-law, which was used during the EPLA negotiations in 2006 to consider a deal with non-EU countries, such as Switzerland. FFII says that if Germany proceeds with the ratification, it will open up the possibility for a second constitutional complaint. The Unitary Patent signals the third attempt to validate and expand software patents in Europe. Following Brexit, the UPC has become a different kind of agreement, whose validity passes now under the supranational jurisdiction and competence of the EU (Articles 216/218 TFEU).

FFII

Einheitspatent in Deutschland nicht mehr ratifizierbar nach dem Brexit aufgrund des AETR-Urteils

By |

PRESSEMITTEILUNG — [ Europa / Brexit / Patent / Demokratie / Wirtschaft / Software ]
Berlin, 19. Februar 2020 — Mit Inkrafttreten des Brexit ist es Deutschland nicht mehr möglich, das Abkommen über das Einheitspatent (Unitary Patent) zu ratifizieren, teilt das FFII mit. Im Zusammenhang mit der Ratifizierung des AETR  (22/70) hat der Europäsche Gerichtshof Rechtsgrundsätze aufgestellt, die während der Verhandlungen 2006 dazu führten, dass nicht-EU-Staaten, wie die Schweiz, ausgeschlossen wurden. Das FFII ist der Ansicht, dass bei einer Ratifizierung in Deutschland eine erneute Verfassungsbeschwerde vielversprechend ist. Das Einheitspatent ist ein dritter Anlauf, um Software-Patente in Europa durchzusetzen.

FFII

L’Allemagne ne peut ratifier le Brevet Unitaire à cause du Brexit et de l’AETR, dit la FFII

By |

COMMUNIQUE DE PRESSE – [ Europe / Brexit / Brevet / Démocratie / Economie / Logiciel ]

Berlin, 19 février 2020 – L’Allemagne n’a pas le droit de ratifier l’actuel brevet unitaire suite au Brexit et à la jurisprudence de l’AETR, selon FFII. La ratification de l’UPC par l’Allemagne constituerait désormais une violation de la jurisprudence AETR, qui a été utilisée lors des négociations sur l’EPLA en 2006 pour considérer un accord avec des pays tiers, comme la Suisse. La FFII indique que si l’Allemagne procède à la ratification, cela ouvrirait la possibilité d’un deuxième recours constitutionnel. Le brevet unitaire est la troisième tentative de validation des brevets logiciels en Europe. À la suite du Brexit, l’UPC devient un accord de différente catégorie, qui relève de la compétence externe de l’Union Européenne (articles 216/218 TFUE).

FFII

Demonstration against Unitary Software Patents thursday 12 dec in Brussels

By |

(Version plus complète en français ici) (More complete version in french here)
FFII calls to demonstrate against Unitary Software Patents, the third attempt to impose software patents in Europe. Software patents are a threat to small- and medium-sized software companies that cannot defend themselves. The UPC (Unified Patent Court) is an international court made outside of the European Union, which would have the last word over the question of software patenting. The Court would favour “patent trolls” which steal our jobs and extort money. Location: Parlement Régional Bruxellois, Rue du Lombard 69, 1000 BrusselsTime: thursday 12 december from 12H00 to 14H00Recommandation: take a ring of keys with you to make noise, preferably the “keys of the kingdom”Tshirts: we will bring new yellow tshirts “NO Unitary Software Patents” Organisation: Benjamin Henrion, FFII eV, @zoobab Contact: zoobab at gmail.com, +32 484 566109

Why the Unitary Patent should be rejected?

FFII

Manifestation contre le Brevet Logiciel Unitaire, jeudi 12 décembre à Bruxelles

By |

(Minimalist english version here)
FFII appelle à manifester contre le Brevet Logiciel Unitaire, la troisième tentative de valider les brevets logiciels en Europe. Les Brevets Logiciels sont des dangers pour les petites entreprises du secteur, qui ne peuvent se défendre. La Cour UPC est une cour internationale captive située au dehors de l’Union Européenne, et qui aura le dernier mot sur la question des brevets logiciels. La Cour UPC favorisera les “trolls des brevets” qui volent nos emplois. En pratique

Lieu: Parlement Régional Bruxellois, Rue du Lombard 69, 1000 Bruxelles
Heure: jeudi 12 décembre de 12H00 à 14H00
Consignes: pensez à prendre un trousseau de clefs qui fait du bruit, les clefs du royaume
Organisateur: Benjamin Henrion, FFII eV, @zoobab
Contact: zoobab at gmail.com, +32 484 566109
Tshirts: nous amenerons des tshirts jaunes “NO Unitary Software Patents”

Pourquoi faut-il rejeter le Brevet Unitaire?

FFII

European Patent Office censors Spanish contributions to its 2023 public consultation

By |

PRESS RELEASE — [ Europe / Spain / Patent / Democracy / Censorship / Economy ]

Madrid, 24 June 2019 – The European Patent Office (EPO) has censored contributions to its public consultation ‘EPO2023’ from spanish companies and citizens. The EPO wanted input from the public on how they could “improve” themselves, but failed to be inclusive. Seven contributions were refused on the basis that the EPO only accept contributions from the public only in its official three languages (English, German, French). Apparently, other contributions in Dutch were also censored. The first form was already biased as the EPO considered all companies to be “patent applicants”, so a normal company interested in to participate had to tick the option “other” instead of “company”.