You are cordially invited to the conference on
Regulating Knowledge: Costs, Risks, and Models of
Innovation
9-10 November 2004
Park Hotel – European Parliament, Brussels
• Overview
This two-day conference, sponsored by MERIT, CEA-PME, the Open Society
Institute, the Greens|EFA in the EP, and FFII, will survey the state of the policy
debate over software patents and its relation to broader issues of access, innovation,
and control of knowledge in the knowledge-based economy.
The first day will emphasize academic and research perspectives on the use and
impact of patents, while the second day will focus on policy issues and policy
context.
• Date and Time
9 November 2004: Park Hotel Brussels, Av. de L'Yser 21, 1040 Brussels, Room
Cinquantenaire
10 November 2004: European Parliament, Rue Wiertz, 1047 Brussels, Room ASP
1G3
• Registration
There is no admission fee for this conference. It is open to all, subject to prior
registration and availability of seats. To register, surf to
http://en.eu.ffii.org/sections/bxl0411/register
• More information
More information, including the full program and background information, can be
found on the conference website at http://en.eu.ffii.org/sections/bxl0411/index/
You may also be interested in the subsequent EIF conference on the same topic,
chaired by Erica Mann MEP, see http://www.eifonline.org
About the Conference
The proposed directive on software patents has erupted into a set of controversies that
strike at the very heart of the Lisbon Strategy: the question of how best to promote and
advance a knowledge-based economy. Originally presented as a mere acknowledgment
and restatement of European Patent Office practice, the directive has become a farreaching debate over how software innovation should or should not be controlled – and
by whom. Ultimately the debate concerns the nature and ownership of knowledge
infrastructure -- the software-based processes, conventions, and applications through
which human knowledge is increasingly created, managed, applied, and used. It is a
debate with sweeping consequences: unlike the physical products and processes that
have been the traditional subject matter of patents, knowledge infrastructure undergirds
and enables all sectors of the economy.
Accumulating evidence
shows that new
knowledge in software,
bioinformatics, and other
information-intensive
QuickTime™ and a
areas is generated,
TIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
diffused, and utilized
are needed to see this picture.
differently than for
industrial technologies.
Official efforts to make
patents easier to get and
assert, following U.S.
practice as a model, have
Cover October 2003 report of the FTC on patents
faced growing evidence
of excesses and
deficiencies in the U.S. system, while highlighting the irony that a legal regime intended
to promote knowledge has escaped monitoring and evaluation. Confidence that the
patent system is working to optimal and positive effect in all areas to which it applies
must rest on real knowledge – scientific observation and informed economic analysis -rather than the expressed convictions of interested parties.
By raising neglected questions about the economic and institutional aspects of the patent
system, the new debate over patents extends beyond software to the design of the
proposed community patent and its concern with the high transaction costs of the patent
system. Europe’s knowledge-based economy is deeply interconnected with a global
knowledge economy, and while Europe cannot isolate itself from the policies of other
nations, it should be wary about “harmonizing” toward models that may disadvantage
European innovators. A U.S. model that encourages both broad and numerous patents
combined with hostility toward the principles of openness and interoperability raises
concerns about uses of patents to limit entry and access in ways that were not
contemplated when patent laws were enacted.
A number of recent developments illustrate the growing scope of the controversy and
its relevance to the Lisbon agenda:
• Research on the use of patent portfolios shows the need to evaluate patents at an
aggregate economic level – not just as a legal regime for
isolated exceptional cases.
• Beyond the different documented uses in competition,
patents serve other purposes that are poorly understood,
such as facilitating R&D outsourcing, enabling taxdeductible donations to universities, and reducing tax
QuickTime™ and a
liability through international relocation of assets.
TIFF (Uncompress ed) dec ompres sor
are needed to s ee this pic ture.
• The voluminous U.S. Federal Trade Commission report,
To Promote Innovation, illuminates major differences in
the impact of the patent system on different industry
sectors. Along with a series of specific recommendations,
the report questions the expansion of patentable subject
matter in the U.S. and calls for more economic analysis in
patent policy.
• The European Commission recently solicited proposals for two studies on the
economic effects of patents: a broad study on the value of
Book by the National
patents (considering costs as well as benefits) and a
Research Council
longitudinal study of the effects of patents on software
development.
• Documentation of EPO practice shows that EPO has been issuing broad software
patents that preempt all solutions, much in the manner of U.S.-style business method
patents.
• Despite official efforts to promote greater use of the patent system, most SMEs
remain wary of its high costs and risks, especially the possibly widespread effects of
software patents. In the U.S. patent assertions against small businesses and nonprofit
organizations are spurring a new form of public interest activism.
• Several governmental efforts have been made to assess the feasibility of subsidized
patent insurance for SMEs. Yet studies reveal high costs and uncertainty in managing
patent risks, especially for software, even at the highly aggregated level of the
reinsurance market.
• New U.S. research indicates that in the case of software, patents actually substitute for
R&D rather than stimulate it. Recent developments have also raised concern about the
use of patent portfolios to exact revenues from a wide spectrum of software
developers and users.
• The debate over software patents has illuminated the diversity of business models and
models of innovation as well as the divergence among different professional and
institutional perspectives. In addition to the free/open source models for software, a
variety of collaborative and mixed models are emerging in other informationintensive fields, such as bioinformatics.
This two-day conference, sponsored by MERIT, CEA-PME, the Open Society Institute,
the Greens|EFA in the EP, and FFII, will survey the state of the policy debate over
software patents and its relation to broader issues of access, innovation, and control of
knowledge in the knowledge-based economy.
Conference Program
Tuesday, 09 Nov 2004
(Park Hotel Brussels, Av. de L'Yser 21, 1040 Brussels, Room Cinquantenaire)
(9h00-9h15)
Registration
Panel 1
(9h15-10h45)
Overview and update: The debate over software patents
This backgrounding session will provide an overview from
different disciplinary and practical perspectives.
Panelists:
• Brian Kahin, University of Michigan, formerly White House
Office of Science and Technology Policy
• Dr. Jean-Paul Smets-Solanes, Nexedi
• Jim Bessen, Boston University
• Florian Müller, Campaign Manager of
Nosoftwarepatents.com
Panel 2
(11h00-12h30
Standards, interoperability and patents
Discussion on how the process of forming standards is
increasingly affected and often hindered by software patent
issues.
Chair: Rishab Ghosh, MERIT, University of Maastricht
Panelists:
• Philippe Aigrain, Society for Public Information Spaces
• Simon Phipps, Sun Microsystems
• Koen Martens, Sender Policy Framework (SPF/Sender-ID)
• Jean-François Abramatic, ILOG, former Chair of W3C
Panel 3
(14h00-15h15)
Lessons from software patent practice in the U.S.
This panel will take a close look at the current state of patent
practice in the U.S. from the practical perspective of firms, and
discuss the implications for public policy.
Panelists:
• Dan Ravicher, Public Patent Foundation
• Bruce Perens, Perens LLC/OSRM
• Len Newman, Open Source Risk Management
• Dr. David Martin, M-Cam Inc.
• Ian Lewis, Miller Insurance
Panel 4
(15h3016h30)
Divergent Directives: What do they say? What do they mean?
This panel will analyze the texts of the different proposals for the
European software patents directive and analyze their wordings.
Panelists:
• Hartmut Pilch, FFII
• David Sant, European Patent Office
Workshop Opening the EPO cabinet: Samples and statistics how different
(16h45directive texts define the scope of patentability
18h00)
Panelists:
• Jozef Halbersztadt, Polish Patent Office
• Jonas Bosson, Illuminet AB
• Hartmut Pilch, FFII
Wednesday, 10 Nov 2004
(European Parliament, Rue Wiertz, 1047 Brussels, Room ASP 1G3)
Welcome
(9h15-9h20)
Daniel Cohn-Bendit, co-president of the Greens|EFA in the
European Parliament
Keynote
(9h20-9h45)
Charlie McCreevy, Commissioner for Internal Market and
Services *
Panel 1
(9h45-11h00)
The Lisbon agenda, the economics of innovation, and patents
on knowledge related processes
This panel will examine what economists know about patents and
innovation, as well as the special issues related to patents on
software-implemented innovations.
Panelists:
• Luc Soete, Director, Maastricht Economic Research Institute
on Innovation and Technology, University of Maastricht
• Jim Bessen, Boston University
• Dietmar Harhoff, Director, Institute for Innovation Research,
Technology Management and Entrepreneurship, University of
Munich
Panel 2
Bottom up economics: defending SMEs and the public
(11h15-12h30) interest
This panel will examine the economic problems of dealing with
patents from an SME perspective.
Panelists:
• Wendy Seltzer, Electronic Frontier Foundation
• Stefan Zickgraf, Secretary General, CEA-PME
• Rita Heimes, Director, University of Maine Technology Law
Center
Panel 3
(14h00-15h15)
New developments in patent practice: assessing the risks
and cost of portfolio licensing and hold-ups
This panel will focus addressing on the risks that patents pose
to software developers and users.
Panelists:
• Dan Ravicher, Public Patent Foundation
• Daniel Egger, Open Source Risk Management
• Jonas Maebe, FFII
Panel 4
(15h30-16h45
Informing and reforming patent policy
This panel will examine options for making the European patent
system more accountable in terms of economic outcomes.
Panelists:
• Brian Kahin, University of Michigan, formerly White House
Office of Science and Technology Policy
• Marianne van der Steen, Technical University of Delft,
formerly Netherlands minister of Economic Affairs
• Susana Borras, University of Roskilde
EIF conference Conference by the European Internet Foundation on the
(17h00-22h30) Patentability of Computer Implemented Inventions, at Hotel
Renaissance, 19 Rue du Parnasse, Brussels. See
http://www.eifonline.org for details and registration information
* To be confirmed