decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
agreed. | 756 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
If you want to say it's a new machine...
Authored by: tiger99 on Thursday, July 19 2012 @ 08:41 PM EDT
Good point! And, if your processing hardware is a Turing machine (most are), it can be replaced by any other design of Turing machine of sufficient performance executing an equivalent program. Remember that the Turing machine can have any arbitrary instruction set, as long as it can go backwards and forwards im memory, read and write to a memory cell, or execute the instruction in the cell. (Loosely interpreted from Turing's original tape-based concept.)

If you can swap the alleged software machine with any other, and still make the system work, the software part of the thing is clearly non-specific, and how would you patent that? Turing's work was in 1936.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

software improves the machine.
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 19 2012 @ 09:13 PM EDT
If software didn't improve the machine, why would we pay for it.

Improvements to machines are patentable.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

agreed.
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 20 2012 @ 12:52 AM EDT
i can even use every known programming language and prolly
come up with just about the same way to get the same results
but having different "machines" thusly for every known
computer language....

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

If you want to say it's a new machine...
Authored by: capt.Hij on Friday, July 20 2012 @ 08:50 AM EDT

Not only that but you have to specify the version of the software. Every time I make an update to the software I make a new machine! Wheee!

Better yet, the people making computers are making a machine that makes machines. They should have patented that idea when they had the chance then the microprocessor would have been off limits to everyone else. Since they use machines to make computers, those machines are machines that make machines that make machines too. Now if there are machines to make those machines....

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

If you want to say it's a new machine...
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 20 2012 @ 10:27 AM EDT
Even better, the computer that you're sitting and typing at, or moving your
mouse, or simply just watching in awe and wonder is a different machine with
every clock tick.

Think about it you patent lawyers... a new machine every clock tick... you know
how many of those there are every second? Just think of all those lovely,
lovely patents.

Sadly, this argument was put before Gene Quinn and his ilk on the PLI Patent
Blog back in 2008. These charlatans are unwilling to learn or use logic.

j

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

What does that do to the waranty? n/t...
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 22 2012 @ 05:09 PM EDT
.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )