From: Hayashi_Tsuyoshi <take@barrier-free.co.jp>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 06:18:54 -0700 (PDT)
To: Robert Hettinga <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Subject: Re: EC patent
Message-ID: <199610181317.WAA07401@ns.barrier-free.co.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Thu, 17 Oct 1996 17:38:28 -0800, jim bell said:
 >At 04:53 PM 10/17/96 -0400, Robert Hettinga wrote:
 >>--- begin forwarded text
 >>Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 14:03:34 +0800
 >>From: James Lee <jlee@ccl.itri.org.tw>
 >>Reply-To: jlee@ccl.itri.org.tw
 >>+----------------------------------------------------+
 >>Addressed to: set-discuss@commerce.net
 >>+----------------------------------------------------+
 >>
 >>I heard that CitiBank has filed for a patent in Japan with 140+ claims

The document is on my desk:

  CitiBank's patent in Japan #: Toku-Kou-Hei 7-111723
    o 104 claims
    o published date: 29 Nov, 1995
    o 112 pages (text: 48 pages, fig.: 64 pages.)

# Note:
# "Toku" means "Tokkyo", "tokkyo" == "patent"
# "Kou" means "Koukoku", "koukoku" == "published"
# "Hei" means "Heisei", "Heisei" is the Japanese year-
#   name; This year == Heisei 8 == 1996.

A publication of the CitiBank's patent was a big news in
industrial or financial domain in Japan.  I found the
article on Nikkei-Sangyo shinbun.

# sangyo == industrial
# shinbun == paper

 >>covering many aspects of electronic commerce, security electronic
 >>transaction, etc.

Probably yes.

 >>--- end forwarded text
 >
 >Maybe Japanese law is different, but don't I recall reading somewhere that 
 >"methods of doing business," business practices in general, are not 
 >patentable? 

It seems that "Toku-Kou-Hei 7-111723" claims specified
procedure, not *general* "methods of doing business".

 >Not that it would surprise me if the Patent Office idiots were to change 
 >their minds, like they did concerning software, algorithms, and mathematics 
 >in general...

I think that Japanese P.O. has changed their policy in a
few years influenced with U.S.P.O.

///hayashi