Introduction

The debate in Europe over the proposed Directive on Computer-Related Inventions has been heated. To the Commission, the proposed directive was non-controversial, simply supporting the decisions of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO and integrating them within a European legal framework, since the EPO is an international body rather than one controlled by the EC. Viewed in that light, it appeared to be a harmonising means to resolve ‘uncertainty and divergences’ in the protection of software across Europe, since by producing a directive, the de facto situation of patent protection for certain kinds of software patents would be harmonised across all member states, and such harmonisation has been the rationale of much of the EC legislative programme. The EPO position was the de facto position because the many important countries in terms of software production have had courts which have accepted the role and decisions of the Boards of Appeal and have, to a very large extent, agreed with the technical contribution approach outlined in Chapter 1: that is, if the invention looks ‘machine-like’, then it is worthy of protection.