on ESP, Ciaran O'Riordan provides his take and some nice quotes on the Enlarged Board of Appeal's response to the referral G3/08:
http://news.swpat.org/2010/05/epo-patents-review-inadmissible/
Patenly-O brings an article by European Patent Attorney Paul Cole on the outcome of the referral:
"The fine print of the opinion will attract obsessive attention from specialists in this area, but the bottom line for the time being is that the status quo will be maintained. European practitioners await the Bilski decision with, if anything, even more interest."
Tufty the Cat feels vindicated at IPKat, since her prediction (indamissibility) came true:
http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2010/05/g-308-software-patents-decision-is-out.html
K's-law: "Although this outcome is not unexpected, the opinion is not without interest because the EBA dwells on how case law is elaborated and what sort of divergences may arise in the process before convergence is finally reached."
http://k-slaw.blogspot.com/2010/05/g-308-right-to-differ.html
Hartmut Pilch at Eupatz summarizes: EPO Supreme Tribunal refuses to arbitrate on Software Patents: “It is Time for the Legislator to Take Over”
http://eupat.ffii.org/10/05/eba/
additional comments on the decisions can be found at:
http://www.visaepatentes.com/2010/05/epo-enlarged-board-of-appeal-found.html
http://cruickshankpatentsandtrademarks.blogspot.com/2010/05/decision-on-case-g308-software.html
http://www.iam-magazine.com/blog/Detail.aspx?g=cc296bce-5de8-484c-ac43-95d5b6ce68df
http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2010/05/software-patents-in-europe-g-308.html


