Talk:List of patent legal concepts

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Patentable subject matter

There seem to be two different ways of defining this - positively and negatively. My definition was negative - stating that certain things are excluded (this revision). User:Jhnmdahl has gone with a positive definition (current revision) stating that certain fields are included.

Does anyone have an opinion either way? As far as the EPC and UK Patents Act are concerned, patents may be granted for inventions, but then certain things are not considered inventions - the definition is therefore a negative one (which is where my version came from). I think, but am not certain that the same is true in the US (can someone confirm please?). I think the point is important as the issue of what is excluded is key to a large swathes of patent law & reform at the moment, also some reading a positive definition may then be confused if they try and find a definition of what they can have a patent for. Kcordina ^Talk 08:13, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I prefer your "negative" definition of patentable subject-matter. In law, patentability is mostly about exceptions to what can be patented, even though EPO case law has found some sort of positive definition (having a technical character, ... but even that positive definition does not cover all the exceptions, see e.g. Art. 53 EPC). --Edcolins 11:10, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Piracy Section

I'm not sure that "Piracy" belongs here. Piracy is not a legal term related to Patent law. Rather, it's a term in popular use to describe a broad range of Patent, Copyright, and Trademark issues. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.67.214.130 (talk) 17:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC).

Good point. There are a number of other terms on the list as well that are not strictly speaking legal terms. Can you propose an alternative page structure/title?--Nowa 22:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)