🚀 go-pugleaf

  [Please repost this in any other lists, local or netwide, where
   it would be relevant and helpful. -len
  ]

WIPO, a part of the United Nations, is working on a treaty to
"harmonize US and European patent law".  Article 10 of the proposed
draft would require that there be patents in all fields of
technology--which inevitably includes software.  (This information
comes from the Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society, Feb
1991, which contains the complete text of the treaty.)

Since the US already has software patents, this would not directly
change the situation here.  However, it would have an important
effect, because it would prevent any future move to eliminate software
patents.  Neither Congress nor the Supreme Court would have any
say in the matter.

However, another part of the treaty would have an immediate effect--it
would make the situation worse.  Article 11 weakens the criterion of
unobviousness that a patent application must satisfy.

Currently, the US Patent Office is supposed to reject patent
applications for an idea that is an obvious combination of several
well-known ideas--a "mosaic of references" to prior art.  Article 11
explicitly forbids rejection using this criterion.  This would cause
an upsurge in the number of absurd patents, not just in software but
in every field.  Large companies would be most able to take advantage
of the new rules, further increasing their power over small
competitors.

(You would generally expect negotiators to aim for a treaty that
requires little change in their own country's system.  However, the US
negotiators pushed strongly for this part of Article 11.  They thus
attempt to push through a change in the laws of their own country,
bypassing the usual legislative system.)

For both of these reasons, it is vital to prevent the adoption of this
treaty.  If we can't stop it from being issued, we must try to prevent
its ratification, in the US and in other countries separately.

The treaty language is supposed to be finalized at a diplomatic
conference in June.  The principal ways Americans can influence the
outcome are via the US administration and via the US Senate.  (If the
Senate makes it clear they wouldn't ratify the treaty, maybe the
negotiators will do something different.)  Writing a letter to your
senators is a step in the right direction, but it's probably not
enough.  You probably need to get together with other programmers to
form a group, and then arrange to meet with your senators' staff to
discuss the problem.  If you want to have an effect.

If you don't want your career turned upside down.