|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 11 2012 @ 01:38 PM EDT |
If the washing machine designer suggests that you use it for email, then using
it for email is not new in a patentable fashion.
Just like putting Toaster Strudel in a Toaster is not patentable; the toaster is
designed to toast anything breadlike of roughly the right size and shape.
It is often hard for people who have not studied the history to realize that the
general purpose computer was GENUINELY designed to run ALL possible software. I
think you are making this error.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 11 2012 @ 01:42 PM EDT |
"the very explicit definition of
process, which is a new use of a machine."
My argument depends ENTIRELY on this definition.
A new use of a machine is a use which *was not suggested or implied* by the
original designers of the machine.
For instance, the use of a pie plate as a Frisbee (to refer to an entertaining
historical interlude.)
However, running *absolutely any software* with *absolutely arbitrary connected
peripherals* is the designer-suggested use of general-purpose computers. And
has been since they were invented.
This means that adding ANY software to a general-purpose computer is a suggested
use, not a new use.
I think, being ignorant of computer history, most judges and patent lawyers
don't know this.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
