|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 11 2012 @ 01:27 PM EDT |
Glad you agree that there's a *general* problem with the patent system.
Back to software. It's pure math. Would you agree that:
(1) distribution of software cannot infringe a patent, because it is
distribution of a mathematical algorithm -- akin to a blueprint...
(2) likewise, creation of software cannot infringe a patent
(3) so, selling software can't infringe a patent either
(4) running software can only infringe a patent if it is as part of a whole
machine designed to do something physical, and if the whole machine is patented
-- running it for another purpose is not infringing
If you agree with all of this, you're halfway to understanding why we have
problems right now. I listed TEN problems with software patents down below --
they're all different from each other. They all need to be dealt with.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Ian Al on Tuesday, June 12 2012 @ 12:39 PM EDT |
Having the idea of doing any function on a computer is now obvious.
The hard part is doing the math.
The hard part of your swipe keyboard invention is not the inventive idea of
'doing the prediction with a computer'. That has already been invented with the
predictive spelling and automatic spelling correction software in word
processors.
The input of swipe patterns is already a feature of the touch pad design. It is
already passed 'to the computer and into memory'. There is very little
difference between applying characters actually typed on a conventional keyboard
and the trajectory lines between the characters to word processing software.
The swipe pattern between two actually operated keys is known in both cases
because of the standard keyboard layout. In the software, a character pair and a
swipe path are identical in meaning. The characters in both cases are the
physical end-points of the swipe path. It's the math, you see.
The only difference between the existing software and the invention is that the
swipe path is defined by a vector in the case of the touch-pad and a character
pair in the case of a conventional key-pad. The touch-pad software designer
might well consider the alternative of vectors with end points versus X-Y
co-ordinates a trivial difference.
In fact, the software designer would probably see no difference at all because
the designer already has to ignore any keys under the path and only consider the
keys under the end points. Why would the designer want to worry about the
geometry when the X-Y information is easier to look up and gives identical
values? In other words, it sounds like a clever invention, but the idea makes no
sense to someone writing software to implement the invention.
I am unhappy with the aha! patents. Many years ago, many inventors came up with
the great aha! invention of the perpetual motion machine. The idea was
unpatentable because the invention could not be made.
I don't believe the law accepts the patenting of an idea for a process or a
machine. The law only accepts the process or the machine as patentable subject
matter.
The swipe keypad is an aha! idea. The invention, itself is the combination of
various catagories of math. because everything outside of the math is
pre-existing hardware and software.
One should not be able to patent the idea on the basis that some fool programmer
ought to be able to get it to work.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
