|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 08 2012 @ 07:24 AM EDT |
I'm sure someone could produce a working model of a Pacific 4-6-2.
The problem was lack of space for storing the models.
But software takes up practically no space at all, so working models for
software patents would not be a problem.
When it comes to litigation, the /working/ model would provide the benchmark for
the infringement - it has to be in the details, not just the observable effects
(after all a mouse trap is a mouse trap and the observable effect may be the
squishing bar coming over to squish the rodent, but the actual mechanism of that
movement may be the protected bit (alas with software patents it would be the
whole mouse trap idea) and that mechanism may not be observable without taking
it apart); so with software patents - the working model would require the
[commented] source code so that actual code could be checked [by an independent
court official/court appointed specialist] to see if the patented algorithm
(sic) was being used.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|