|
Authored by: Ian Al on Wednesday, October 24 2012 @ 12:53 PM EDT |
I would remind you of PolR's recent piece on 'Software is Mathematics'. I use
that piece as the basis for the following comments. (I know you will understand
the points, anyway, because you have a good understanding of how computers do
their stuff, but PolR's piece makes for a concise argument.)
Processors
do not have, in their repertoire, instructions for displaying electronic
documents. They can only manipulate symbols. Software can only use the
instructions of the processor. Anything over and above the processor
instructions are concepts in the software writer's mind and expressed in a
computer language that can be translated into processor executable instructions.
An 'electronic document file' is a computer file containing symbols
that can be used in the simulation of real world physical documents that have
the content represented by the symbols in the file.
The following
elements of the claims are, in my view, not components of the invented machine
or materials manipulated by the invented machine because there are no such
instructions available to execute in the computer.
instructions for
displaying an electronic document
instructions for detecting a movement
of an object on or near the touch screen display
instructions for
translating the electronic document displayed on the touch screen
display
instructions for displaying an area beyond an edge of the
electronic document
The last of these also contains the invalid term
'an edge of the electronic document'. Computer professionals do not have a
meaningful term of art for edges in electronic files. The 'edges' only apply to
the simulation of a real world paper document on the display.
Even when
the file is a file of symbols that can be interpreted in some way as a
'document' (e.g. a file of ASCII symbols), 'displaying the document' is
displaying an illusion of a real world document by simulating pages on which are
printed the glyphs represented by the ASCII symbols. The edges are not in the
document file, even if margins are specified and the real world paper size is
given. Those dimensions are only relevant to a real world document.
One
other point I would make, here, relates to this part of claim
19:instructions for displaying an area beyond an edge of the
electronic document and displaying a third portion of the electronic document,
wherein the third portion is smaller than the first portion, in response to the
edge of the electronic document being reached while translating the electronic
document in the first direction while the object is still detected on or near
the touch screen display;
If we overlook my objections, above,
then this part is a functional description of what the machine does. The other
parts of the claim are simulation features usually well supported by most modern
operating systems and, while not being within the general skill of the art, are
available to programmers as APIs.
We now have to consider Fonar v.
GE:As a general rule, where software constitutes part of a best mode
of carrying out an invention, description of such a best mode is satisfied by a
disclosure of the functions of the software.
This is because,
normally, writing code for such software is within the skill of the art, not
requiring undue experimentation, once its functions have been disclosed. It is
well established that what is within the skill of the art need not be disclosed
to satisfy the best mode requirement as long as that mode is
described.
Is that functional description of what the combination
of hardware and software does as part of the machine invention, 'within the
skill of the art, not requiring undue experimentation, once its functions have
been disclosed'?
I would suggest it is not within the skill of the art
because of the challenge of writing the code that simulates the behaviour is not
run of the mill stuff to be done by the journeyman software writer. If that is
the case, then writing the claim in purely functional terms, as we have here,
does not satisfy the general rule given in Fonar.--- Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid! [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, October 24 2012 @ 03:49 PM EDT |
> using a blue glow instead of displaying an area
> beyond the edge of the document.
I would suppose the area beyond the edge of a document
does not exist, thus displaying it is an illusion...
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|