> As a result, the widespread belief in the non-patentability of software is simply a misconception, partly as a result of insufficient training of innovators and the lobbying activities of certain interested parties.
> The European Patent Convention states that software is not patentable. But laws are always interpreted by courts, and in this case interpretations of the law differ. So the European Patents Office (EPO) grants software patents by declaring them as "computer implemented inventions".
Yes I find the EPO to be a bit shady by accepting software patents, and the fees, when the patents aren’t enforceable by law. I’m not a lawyer but I known how to read and I would ignore the patents trolls and I consider the risk to lose in court very low. The day something like the VideoLan association loses a trial, I may reconsider my position.
https://www.novagraaf.com/en/insights/patentability-software...
> As a result, the widespread belief in the non-patentability of software is simply a misconception, partly as a result of insufficient training of innovators and the lobbying activities of certain interested parties.
https://fsfe.org/activities/swpat/swpat.en.html
> The European Patent Convention states that software is not patentable. But laws are always interpreted by courts, and in this case interpretations of the law differ. So the European Patents Office (EPO) grants software patents by declaring them as "computer implemented inventions".