News Relating To Patents On Computer-Implemented Inventions

It would not come as a surprise if one of the NGOs which had been most active during the first half of this decade in fighting against the Draft Directive on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions would join and prepare a flamy paper against any patentability in the surroundings of software. This NGO is the FFII, surely well known to everbody participating in the public debate on the patentability of such computer-implemented inventions. See, for example, their latest on-line project http://www.stopsoftwarepatents.eu/

Under the date of December 06, 2008, there is a posting titled "OOXML is Patent Trap, Royalties Render it Obsolete". Embedded therein, somewhat odd, is an excerpt from an internal section of the FFII website:

"8.8. Setup new organisation (S. Uhlmann)

The proposed resolution is:

Set up a new association, transferring as many asserts of the FFII as possible to this new organization (when possible by law), allow it to act in the name of the FFII, ask supporters and members of the FFII to join it.

Justification:

The current problems with the tax office and the public benefit status are harming the FFII. Not only that it costs money. The unclear future and the possibility of unknown liabilities are blocking us. Also it creates friction between ourselves in discussing all these problems.

The idea is to set up another FFII 2.0. The old FFII 1.0 just fades out. The tax office can go after the old “empty shell” but all new activities are done under the FFII 2.0 umbrella. The liabilities will be isolated within FII 1.0.

The new organistion could be set up in another country where association law is more relaxed. May that be Belgium, Poland or even another German e.V. again (maybe with a different foundation place). That should be discussed.

The board of FFII 2.0 could be the same board as FFII 1.0 as a sign that this is not a split-up or separatist movement but only a legal/organisational measure to solve the legal/organisational problem and that we the FFII-people all stand behind FFII 2.0. That should be discussed.

The name of FFII 2.0 should make clear that this is the same FFII as FFII 1.0. E.g. by choosing the same name (if legally possible) or a similar name which is also abbreviated as FFII. That should be discussed.

All members of FFII 1.0 are encouraged to join FFII 2.0. I think it would not be difficult to explain them that this is just because of legal problems and our incompatibility with the public benefit status of German association law.

Everyone is invited to bring proposals for the new association including statutes to the GA."

Ouch. Instead of actively agitating in favour of a dissolution of the EPO, the FFII appears to be on the brink to dissolute itself. Who would have dared to think in this direction a couple of years ago?

(Photo (C) 2005 by Nath el Biya via Flickr and licensed under CC)