I present E=MC2 as prime exhibit A.
The proof of it was
never done before, and it certainly wasn't too obvious even to experts in the
given field.
However, the point I'm making is: before one can discuss the
limitations of an applied patent, one must first discuss whether particular
subject matter is even patentable.
To suggest software as applied to a
computer is patentable subject matter is to suggest "entering 1+1= into a
calculator" is patentable subject matter.
Do you really believe "entering
1+1= into a calculator" should be patentable subject matter? Forget that such a
basic calculation should obviously fail if it is patentable subject
matter.
Do you believe a process outlined as "entering 1+1= into a
calculator" should be patentable subject matter and why?
After
all... what's the difference between "entering the proof of E=MC2
into a computer" vs "entering the proof of E=MC2 into a
calculator"?
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|