|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, October 15 2012 @ 10:37 AM EDT |
So what?
If I understand you correctly, an algorithm (unpatentable)
blindly maniplates symbols. This is a subset of "process",
but a process which also has a physical effect (e.g., curing
rubber) is patentable. In effect, a process patent is a
field-of-application patent. (This leads to a problem of
defining the "field of application": a "one-click-shopping"
process that results in a book leaving a warehouse is
patentable by your logic; can the same patent cover the
delivery of CDs?)
It's hard to think of a software patent that would not be
granted (with some minor re-wording) if we adopt your test.
Some RSA, MP3, and JPEG type patents, maybe. (I think I
could still get them patented by mentioning the physical
file storage medium.) But the most obnoxious patents like
one-click shopping, or XYZ "over the internet" or "on a cell
phone"? Still granted.
I think you think that if the algorithm is excluded, then
"on a cell phone" becomes too obvious to be patentable.
Logically you're right, but we're dealing with the patent
system, where there are two problems with that idea: 1)
essentially NOTHING is too obvious for a patent to be
granted; 2) The whole point of subject matter exclusion is
to avoid an expensive lawsuit for a successful defense. If
you're arguing about obviousness, you've already lost.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Imaginos1892 on Monday, October 15 2012 @ 04:01 PM EDT |
We can take it one step further. While knocking down a troll last
week I realized that a computer program is even more abstract
than we have been claiming. It is not a method, or a process, or
even an algorithm; it is a DESCRIPTION or DEFINITION of an
algorithm to be performed by a computer.
It's a very detailed description, and it can be really hard to get it
just right, but the program never DOES anything. It simply describes
a series of operations in a form the computer can use; the computer
does the do-ing when it processes the program.
Software does not manipulate symbols. It describes symbol
manipulations to be performed, and it is irrelevant whether
they are performed by a computer, a human, or an inifinite
number of monkeys.
--------------------
It takes two to make peace. It only takes one to make war.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
