|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 04 2013 @ 09:13 PM EST |
a specific multi-touch gesture to do a specific
task
In my humble opinion, that's not patentable subject matter due
to any one of:
A: It's math, nothing more!
What we observe as the
effect is simply from how we interpret what happens. If we didn't interpret, it
would be meaningless algorithmic processing.
B: It's abstract!
A
specific gesture to do a specific task. I have a specific gesture: Hold your
pen, on a sheet of paper, swoop it straight down and put a half loop to the left
at the bottom! Do you honestly believe someone printing the letter J should be
a patentable act? Really? That's an abstract concept, nothing more!
C:
It's using the device for exactly nothing more then it was built for!
No
one here is arguing that if you combine a computer with motors and gyros and
build a robot that the robot is not patentable subject matter. That's using the
device - the computer - along with a bunch of other things to build something
bigger then any given individual unit.
To apply software to the computer
is to do nothing more then use the device for exactly what it was built for. If
you wish to patent "software applied to the computer" then you should also
patent "algorithm applied to a calculator". You honestly believe an algorithm
applied to a calculator should be patentable subject matter?
D: Software
applied to hardware is nothing more then applying instructions to the
device.
If you wish to have that patentable subject matter, then you must
also be willing to patent "fingers as applied to an abacus", "feet as applied to
the break of a vehicle", "pressing the particular combination of buttons on a
coffee pot to produce coffee at 6:30 am". You honestly believe such activities
should be patentable?
E: Patent Exhaustion
I don't know if the
following concept exists in the Law under the concept of Patent Exhaustion, but
I think it should.
The moment someone is taught how to use a calculator -
the application of any math algorithm no matter how complex becomes obvious when
applied to the calculator to speed up the calculation.
To patent a
process of applying an algorithm to a calculator is to - in effect - take
knowledge that the public already has away from them. It doesn't matter how
simple or complex the algorithm is. The algorithm itself is not patentable
subject matter. Take the formula:
I = P r t
That's not patentable
subject matter.
Apply the formula P r t on the calculator, read the
result
Should not be patentable either. Everyone who is ever taught the
basics of how to use the calculator already knows what to do with the formula
and the calculator.
It is no different then patenting "Apply the formula
P r t on paper and read the result".
The most complex math formula is
still math. It is - according to the Supreme's - not patentable subject matter.
Therefore, the only part about "apply formula to calculator" that can possibly
be patented is the use of the device. So if I apply the algorithm to a
calculator, I infringe a patent, but if I apply it via pencil and paper, I don't
infringe....????
Patent exhaustion: upon teaching the basic use of the
device one can no longer patent the basic use of the device!
As I said,
if that concept doesn't exist in the Law, it should.
Once you learn to
program a computer, there is no algorithm you can not place on a computer under
any language. The only limitation is:
Whether or not you understand the
algorithm!
We can not program what we do not understand!
You can
pick any software algorithm you want. The algorithm itself is nothing more then
an abstract concept, a non-patentable subject matter. To apply that to a
computer should be considered patent exhaustion because we already know we can
apply abstract concepts to the device!
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, January 04 2013 @ 10:19 PM EST |
Honestly, you are a software developer since '94 and you
believe that performing a specific gesture on a touchpad and
an action happening is worthy of patent protection for 20
years?
You believe it is so innovative that someone should be able
to have to explain in to others the process and steps to do
this innovative action so that the industry can be bettered
as a whole?
So something obvious like sliding your finger or stretching
an image is patent-worthy?
Can you imagine every smartphone and tablet creator having
to use different gestures for everything? The consumer would
be baffled and confused in no time at all. Rather than use
the obvious gesture, new manufacturers would have to use
something ever more obscure to make sure they didn't
infringe.
Stop this madness, who does it help? Does it improve
technology for a nation? For the world?
Design a machine that can more efficiently harness the power
of the sun to provide energy and you deserve a patent but a
gesture on a touchpad, a software algorithm? Madness.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Not Anti Patent - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, January 09 2013 @ 04:19 PM EST
| |
| Authored by: PJ on Friday, January 04 2013 @ 10:32 PM EST |
Here's why I think gestures should never be
patentable: there are a small and finite list
of possible gestures. So innovation is
quickly blocked, because new entrants can't
do the most obvious and widely used gestures.
So they can't compete.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, January 06 2013 @ 12:09 AM EST |
A gesture is simply a word in a non-spoken language. Where, exactly, are you
seeing in that proposal anything but an abstract, trivial, obvious idea?
-j[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, January 08 2013 @ 06:24 AM EST |
you can't patten software thanks for being clear about how
your mind doesn't work and you must have some patent that you
want to keep and yet don't want others to have them.
I bet that's the parents actual situation.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
