While digging in my document archives have found my old diploma work in the Higher School of Social Technologies on the topic “Copyright protection in the sphere of software development”, 2005.

One of the conclusions made based on the analysis of the existing legislation and practice in Latvia was the following.

(original translated to english)

[…] 2) The second possible through the development of this industry is the transition to patent protection and establish an analogy between the industrial technology and data processing technology, which, however, fraught with great difficulties controlling software patents worldwide, and involves the creation of the repository of algorithms (ie, their software implementations), the type of Patent Institute Software, that will avoid duplication of software implementations, and improving technology, reusability of software. 3) As the legal ways to solve the above problems, we propose: […] 3.5.to use the concept of intellectual property and intellectual abilities of the author in determining the patentability of computer programs, as opposed to that used in the copyright act the concept of creativity. This fact is explained by the fact that the specifics of creating computer programs often requires the developer to considerable intellectual, but not the creative effort, which also confirms the terminology used in Directive 91/250/EES “On Legal Protection of Computer Programs” from May 14, 1991;

In essence I was advocating to use the concept of intellectual property, patent protection and intellectual abilities of the author for computer programs.

Well … I can only say now … I was just kidding … Ok?