Software inventions clearly have a requirement to have a technical feature that will make progress. The requirement is not only based on the computer program as such an exclusion, but on the inventive requirement. Therefore, the reason for granting patents only for computer software inventions, once they involve technical progress, is fulfilled. The EPO seeks to keep the term „technical” flexible by not defining it. The way in which patents for computer programs are granted is also changing, which demonstrates the flexibility of Article 52 EPC. EPO case law and guidelines describe when the program is a patentable invention. The notion of flexibility presupposes that there is a certain space for discussion, more controversial and more debated than some or other of the definitions specific to the legal field, but not at all unusual. In conclusion, the rationale specific to Article 52 EPC is fulfilled. We can say that because the European Patent Convention is so closely linked to the EEC, it is a regional arrangement, the provisions of which reflect interests and motives that may not always be identical or even compatible with those underlying the Paris Convention, of wider and truly international applicability.