decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
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

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
A blue print is copyrightable | 364 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Status: Fail
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 09 2013 @ 04:35 PM EST

Problem: Conflation between the physical and the abstract.

the HDL model clearly stands in the same place relative to the physical CPU
That doesn't make the HDL model any more physical.

If a CPU was sitting on a desk in front of you, you could clearly point at it.

The fact you have to point at the physical CPU, then draw a correlation to the HDL model proves you can not point directly at the physical embodiment of the HDL model.

One could do exactly the same replacing the HDL model with a blueprint schematic. I seriously doubt you're pointing at the physical CPU would convince the Supremes that the blueprint schematic is not abstract, that it's equally physical and so a patent should be granted on the schematic.

As a result: You have failed to point to a physical embodiment of the HDL model.

RAS

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

A blue print is copyrightable
Authored by: myNym on Wednesday, January 09 2013 @ 11:08 PM EST
It is not patentable.

What you build from the blueprint _might_ be patentable.

But the blueprint itself is not.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

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 )