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
The CPU is a concrete invention. | 364 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
The CPU is a concrete invention.
Authored by: dio gratia on Tuesday, January 08 2013 @ 06:59 PM EST
But you aren't equating the language used in describing it with the physical
embodiment other than for implementation verification purposes. The sign isn't
the referent.

Software source code as in the Hardware Description Language used as input to a
simulator or for synthesizing the CPU design to the transistor and wire level is
not the CPU itself or programmed cell and interconnects for your Field
Programmable Gate Array implementation. The HDL source code doesn't contain an
FPGA. It describes the FPGA's behavior at a programmed physical level.

The 'invention' is a configured FPGA, assuming that the 'design' is novel and
useful. Limiting usefulness is any required I/O enabling the CPU to transform
or reduce to another state any subject matter of the patent. There is likewise
a lack of novelty in programming (configuring) and FPGA.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Conflation is still conflation: Fail
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, January 08 2013 @ 08:15 PM EST

There is no disputing the physical cpu is physical.

The fact you can create an abstract situation to test the logic that the CPU would be expected to perform does not alter the fact such a test is still abstract!

You have basically said:

    CPU is physical
    I can do what the CPU does in the concept of software
    Therefore software must be physical
If that's all it took to change the abstract into the physical then the Supremes would not have invalidated the patent in Mayo vs Prometheus.

If that was your effort to prove the physical existence of software: Fail!

RAS

[ 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 )