Richard Stallman wrote:
These reports are good news, but they don't mean we have won. If the old patent law is allowing software patents in, keeping it unchanged won't keep them out.
We have to do something more. But we have lost the chance to try to use this patent bill to do it. Ramanraj thinks these patents are invalid and that the law is being misapplied. Is there a way to convince the patent office of that? Should we go to court and see? Or should we hope that doubts about validity restrain the patent holders from using their patents against Indian software developers and users?
Defending false and illegal claims should be easier.
Before we proceed to the effect of grant of patents, it would be useful to understand the system of *land* registration in vogue in India. Land is immovable, physically verifiable, could be surveyed, measured and described rather accurately with help of landmarks, field maps, ariel surveys, satellite pictures etc.
Globally, two systems of land registration exist:
[1]Deed System followed in India etc.
[2]Torrens System, in vogue in Australia, Canada etc.
Under the Torrens system, registration both notifies about the transfer and also actually vests the land in the transfree. Whereas, under the Deed System followed in India, transfer of immovable properties is made by execution and registration, where the Registrar is duty-bound to register the deed without examination of the validity of the same. Mere registration gives no assurance to the purchaser as to the title in land. It is a general statement to the world that a particular document has been executed. A person with no interest may sell, say even a clearly public place such as Marina Beach, with little or no consequence, except that the Registration department has earned some revenue by way of stamp duty. Naturally, the Deed System is an easy source for disputes between those who own property, and one of the main source of "work" for lawyers in the civil side. Such is the system of *land* registration in vogue in India - a far cry from the Torrens system.
Now, Patents are "intellectual properties" abstracted out of the thin air. Though originally, the Patent Offices appear to have insisted upon the production of a real and working model of the invention, it is no longer the rule, and the invention is merely asserted airily under a written document and there is no need to map the abstract to a working model of the invention. "Prior art" is just that - any "art" that may exist in prior filings. It is believed that 30 million patents are in force. Given our *land* registration system, please imagine the kind of verification that could be done to rule out prior art. Grant of patents is definitely not infallible, and naturally, they could be questioned before a court. The claims of the patentee are taken at face value and do not mean much.
Arun has listed some of the "patents" granted recently, and there is one regarding a method of payment. Nothing could be more comical. Legal tender of money is defined by law, and it is innane nonsense to grant a patent for a method of payment. We should ignore these "patents" just as we would ignore a "sale of Marina Beach".
BTW, just a thought: it may be useful to study if Torrens system is worth following in India :)