Software is abstract. It's a an interpretive language applied to "the
particular pattern of electrical flow"1.
In that regard,
there's absolutely zero difference in patenting software as there is in
patenting a particular flow of morse code.
Software does not exist in
physical form. You can not point to anything and call it the physical
embodiment of software anymore then you can point to a book and call it the
physical embodiment of English.
While you can author a set of
instructions in the form of software you can do exactly the same in the form of
a blueprint. In both cases, the information available in the software/blueprint
are interpreted under the human concept of communication. They - themselves -
are not the inventions they are used to define and describe.
While you
can use descriptive language to describe a steaming cup of coffee - even to the
point someone reading the description could be salivating in anticipation - the
reality is that the description is still not a steaming cup of coffee. It holds
no nurishment for the physical body.
Yet all the above touch on the
reasons many give as to why software should be patentable.
Reasons that
overlook the fact that software always has been, and always will be, nothing
more then abstract language used for communication purposes.
The simple
correlation that since software shares certain apparent features with something
in the physical world, since that object exists in the physical world, software
must exist in the physical world. A very poor correlation which falls apart
immediately upon even basic analysis. No matter how strong a correlation is
that is presented, the software description of a cup of coffee will never - ever
- be a physical cup of coffee.
Like Morse, English and Blueprints -
software is nothing more then another abstract language that serves a particular
purpose!
1: The pattern takes on many physical forms
such as magnetic, electricity or even hole punch. The focus should be on the
concept of interpreting the physical pattern - not the particular physical
technical detail difference that may exist in a given implementation.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|