... the US Supreme Court?
I think I choose to believe the US Supreme
Court. After all - unless you are one of the Supreme's they are authority over
you as far as interpreting the Law is concerned.
As a result, Patent Law
extends further then the limited that you presented.
The Supreme's have
made quite clear that abstract concepts (such as math) and Laws of Nature (such
as gravity) are not patentable subject matter.
Math isn't the only
abstract concept known to humanity. Language is as well. And software is
merely the combined use of Language and Math in order to direct machinery to
perform an expected pattern of "information processing". And yes, information
processing is also abstract. This is absolutely no different then the music
role on an old player piano. The medium (paper) has changed (plastic, medal,
etc.). The information (holes) has changed (burn, magnetic field,
But it's still nothing more then using a language to direct a
device. Much like when you "push the buttons 2+2= and read the calculator
As a result - it's only a matter of time till the Supreme's
realize software is abstract, does not exist in any physical form, and as a
result is clearly not patentable subject matter.
My humble non-legal
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]