Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

You keep setting up strawmen | 443 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

You keep setting up strawmen

Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, January 01 2013 @ 12:39 PM EST

and knocking them down.

I never said the software itself was patented, except as a component of a larger
invention (which, I believe was the case in Diamond).

However, I believe (and probably stated) that the _effect_ was the same.

This is true if you look around. You keep going on about simulations. Who
cares? (Well, actually I do, before I tape out a chip, but that's a different
story.)

If you can patent the machine or process that _uses_ the software, then,
practically speaking, you have a monopoly on using software in that manner.

I don't care whether you call that a patent on the software or not -- that's
simply playing games with words. If you foreclose on others being able to do
the same useful stuff with software, for most practical purposes, what you have
done are indistinguishable from an actual patent on the software -- you can shut
down your competitors, extract rents, whatever.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

But it is not a strawman - Authored by: myNym on Tuesday, January 01 2013 @ 01:27 PM EST
- But it is not a strawman - Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, January 01 2013 @ 01:45 PM EST
  - Thank you for the link - Authored by: myNym on Tuesday, January 01 2013 @ 01:52 PM EST
    - Sure, the software's not patented - Authored by: pem on Tuesday, January 01 2013 @ 06:01 PM EST

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )