Both the USPTO and the courts must abide by the law. To get a patent an
invention must be over and above the normal skill of the art, truly an
innovation, not an abstract idea, law of nature or math and be useful enough to
warrant patent protection.
I would add a new exclusion. A patent cannot be awarded to methods, processes or
machines that are patents on the skill of the art, itself.
No more patents on methods of programming, methods of machining mechanical
parts, methods of painting pictures or any other methods of exercising the
skills where the patent is on the skill, itself, rather than something made by
employing the skill.
If, after reading a patent application, an invention cannot be made and
demonstrated by someone skilled in the art of the best mode of making the
invention, then the patent is an invalid patent. The demonstration is a very
important point. If a method or process cannot be shown to produce something
enduring in the real world, then it is not a patentable, useful process, but
just an exercise of the skill of the art.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
