[Fsf-friends] Left saves the day!

[Ramanraj K]

  Certainly, many reports were far from accurate going
against the debates reported at:
http://164.100.24.208/today/tdailydeb.htm

It may be a spectacular success after all!  Not only, that, it *might*
include an *important* amendment touching upon computer programs, that
we should wait to hear from authoritative sources.

Meanwhile, a little food for thought:

I  just had the  chance to  read the  following document  published at
http://cpim.org/upa/2004_patents.pdf

<quote>
Left Parties on Amendments to the Indian Patent Act
Dec 20, 2004

The  Group of  Ministers had  made available  to us  the  draft Patent
(Third) Amendment Bill for  our consideration and suggestions. We were
told about  the predicament faced  by the Government: The  Patents Act
1970 had  already been  substantially altered and  diluted by  the two
amendment bills enacted by the previous NDA government. There was also
the so-called deadline of TRIPs to  be observed. And hence the need to
push  through  the  Third  amendment  bill as  proposed.   Either  the
reasoning  or  the conclusions  of  the  Government  did not  convince
us.  Nevertheless,  we tried  to  understand  the  compulsions of  the
Government and limit  our suggestions to the absolute  minimum that is
needed to be done to safeguard the national interest...

Draft Patents Bill 2003
=======================
Clause 3(k) and (ka)

(k) a computer  programme per se other than  its technical application
to industry or a combination with hardware; (ka) a mathematical method
or a business method or algorithms;

Amendment Suggested
===================
Clause 3(k)

(k) a mathematical method or a business method or a computer programme
per se or algorithms; Clause (ka) be deleted

Comments of Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion
=======================================================

This issue has  been discussed by the JPC during  the 2nd Amendment to
the Patents  Act. The  proposed changes  are more in  the nature  of a
classification,   due   to   confusing   interpretations   that   have
arisen. Section 3  of the Act contains details of  items which are not
inventions  within  the  meaning  of   the  Act  and  hence,  are  not
patentable.   This   section  also  provides,  inter   alia,  that  "a
mathematical  or computer  programmes per  se or  algorithms"  are not
patentable.   However, this  provision has  been subject  to confusing
interpretations, (such  as whether 'per se' applies  only to computers
programme, or also to  mathematical or business methods. Also, whether
technical applications of computer  programmes are patentable or not).
Given the  emerging opportunities in  the software sector  and growing
Indian strength in information  technology, it is necessary to clarify
the provisions in Section 3 (k) so as to allow patenting of a computer
programme only  in case it  has technical applicatioos  in combination
with  hardware. Software  alone is  already protected  under copyright
laws. It is  also proposed to clarify that  a mathematical or business
method  or  algorithm  will  not  be  patentable.  The  Department  of
Information  Technology  has suggested  the  incorporation  of such  a
clarification  which is  now  proposed  to be  included.  The GoM  has
considered this issue and noted  that the proposed clarification is in
the larger national interest.

Reply to Comments by Deptt. of Industrial Policy and promotion
==============================================================
Draft Bill reduces the scope of  what is not patentable in the area of
computer  programmes. This  is not  in  the interest  of the  software
industry in India.  To the contray, it could  promote the interests of
monopolies  like Microsoft. If  the qualification  per se  is creating
confusion, the same  may be deleted from the original  Clause 3 (k) of
the present Act, without any other Amendments.

</quote>

I came  to know about the  above, just this morning  from the cpim.org
website.  On 21st, the very same amendment was independently suggested
for another reason:

The best justification for the amendment sought is this:

"Under the TRIPS agreement, "computer programs" shall be protected by
copyrights.  In this context "per se" is a meaningless qualification,
and the amendment would make our law fully TRIPS compliant."

The fact that US issues patents for software merely means that the US
is violating TRIPS and India should complain to the WTO against the
practice, claiming heavy damages for the violation.  If India succeeds
with this amendment, our friends in Europe would be too happy to
follow suit.  It would put considerable pressure on US to modify their
law."

If Section 3(k)  reads "a mathematical or business  method or computer
program or algorithms",  it should be a very,  very important success,
far beyond having the proposed changes alone dropped.

We have now fulfilled all our so called "International Obligations"

 India  *should*  complain to  the  WTO  against  the US  practice  of
 "software patents" that are a serious trade barrier in US.

Meanwhile,  we should  prepare  a letter  thanking all  the
people who have made this possible.