Authored by: kawabago on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 09:26 PM EST |
When software runs on a computer it magically turns the
computer into another device that can be patented. You can't
see the change, so it's a lot like the emperor's new cloths,
but lawyers insist it's a real change! Hocus Pocus run
program and POOF! You're sitting at a dedicated electronic
recipe machine, then suddenly POOF! You're at a dedicated
email transceiving machine. Then again POOF! You're suddenly
sitting at a video phone machine. With these blindly fast
reorganizations of matter it's hard to see how anyone can
keep up!
All this magic is just too much for me.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Charles888 on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 10:39 PM EST |
Even if Kelley believes that software is not patentable
subject matter, arguing so at the Federal Circuit is counter
productive.
The Federal Circuit, the USPTO and the legal system in
general are too far from this point to be able to make a dent
in such a venue. The best we can hope for there is a
narrowing of the criteria for patentability.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 09 2013 @ 03:25 AM EST |
Although the pencil and paper test eliminates patents on
devices of the type "algorithm run on a Turing complete
machine" (i.e. most software patents), I guess it might leave
open:
- Non-deterministic machines (e.g. some kinds of quantum
algorithms)
- Anything where the run-time of the algorithm is integral to
its performance (e.g. industrial control).[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 09 2013 @ 04:36 AM EST |
Software patents won't be eliminated, so expect abstract to be patentable. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: webster on Saturday, February 09 2013 @ 07:14 AM EST |
.
It is like patenting the pencil for each application.
.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Exactly - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, February 09 2013 @ 10:10 AM EST
|