|
|
|
| Authored by: Wol on Thursday, November 29 2012 @ 06:34 PM EST |
Then yes it would be patentable subject matter. Thing is, the process would have
to include a person or a computer or something that had actual physical
existence.
And the application would likely fail on the basis that the physical item had
already been patented ...
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 30 2012 @ 03:56 PM EST |
You state:
the ideas can still be abstract even when the
subject of those ideas, hedging, is not.
I think the confusion
lies in the fact you believe hedging is not abstract. You don't actually
present any proof to back that, but it is quite clear you believe the "subject
of ... hedging ... is not [abstract]".
So, very serious question:
Why
do you believe the concept of hedging is not abstract?
Hedging is just the
knowledge of how you could balance the risk of an investment. You can implement
your knowledge of hedging without any tools just by:
reading an article in
the news
recognizing the risk you have in the stock affected has
increased beyond a comfortable level
acting upon that to decrease that
risk - such as by selling the stock
So perhaps you can explain why you
believe hedging is not abstract. Please keep in mind the basic definition of
abstract as you consider why you think it's not abstract:
Existing in
thought or as an idea but not having a physical or concrete
existence.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
