The sewing machine analogy is quite good: Although it's not possible
(or reasonable) to patent the sewing of straight lines it is possible to patent
a novel method of sewing waterproof seams. A good patent specification for this
would keep the type of sewing machine, thread and so on as general as possible
while describing the essential features that made this a new method. Switching
back to software this corresponds to patenting a new algorithm without
describing the computer or listing the code.
Really? That's
interesting. No changes in the hardware of the actual sewing machine, let's say
from the traditional Singer sewing machine then? A different needle? Or maybe a
different cloth/fabric? Perhaps you're using a different thread? Or was there
a primer, sealer or glue used?
Of these changes, only a new thread or new
cloth could be, I think, considered as being similar to a new algorithm. The
other changes would be more akin to adding a or changing peripheral.
Perhaps
the cloth has a sealer in-built so that when it's punctured by the needle it
bleeds and the resulting coagulant seals the two pieces of fabric together.
Wouldn't the patent be on the cloth though rather than the action of sewing the
cloth?
So, perhaps you'd be kind enough to detail what differences there are
between a standard setup - cotton cloth, cotton thread on a normal type of
sewing machine with a normal needle. (And please use common sense in your answer
rather than arguing about the definition of a "normal type of sewing machine"
is.)
I'm quite interested as I've used a few different sewing machines to
make a number of different products varying from waterproof, thermally
insulating, acoustically insulating and decorative in a variety of shapes and
sizes and using different types of thread (cotton, glass fibre, Kevlar and
steel) and cloth (glass fibre, Kevlar and cotton).
I'm by no means an expert
sewer, it was more than 15 years ago and I can't say I sewed every possible
combination of needle, thread, machine and cloth, nor have I ever bothered
looking at the patents of sewing machines or at the actual hardware in a sewing
machine, but you've got me intrigued.
I guess you think that using a
different thread, needle, fabric or using the sealer is the same as using
different software, so let's go with that one then. After sewing your
waterproof seam, what has changed with the sewing machine? Is it still the same
sewing machine?
Let's say that you don't need a sealer. Using the same
thread and needle that you use to make the waterproof seal is it still possible
to sew as normal? What is the invention with your waterproof seal?
The
point of the sewing machine analogy, I think, is that doing something different
with what you've got that is within the normal usage of what you've got is not
deserving of a patent. A computer was designed to be programmed. It was
designed to take inputs and it was designed to produce outputs.
In Diehr,
the outputs went outside the usual combination of
CPU/memory/keyboard/mouse/monitor to a new output type and the computer was only
a part of the claimed patent.
A sewing machine was designed to sew cloth
using a needle and thread. If you add something else to the system, like a
sealer, then you're changing the process by adding something that was not
already there so it is not like software.
Your patent on sewing a waterproof
seam, I believe, would have introduced something external to the machine that is
new and non-obvious and would be more akin to creating a new machine containing
a CPU in combination with software to control the machine - kinda like Diehr
invented his rubber curing machine with a CPU to control it.
I'm sorry that
I may have been a little incoherant. Too little time and too much to think
about that's just wrong about what you said.
j [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
| 
