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
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

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


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

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
That's the problem when you start arguing the absurd | 297 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
That's the problem when you start arguing the absurd
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, January 21 2013 @ 12:35 PM EST

Sooner or later your logic becomes impossible because it becomes obviously contradictory.

And therin lies the biggest problem with why most of the solutions that are trying to "fix the software patent problem" will fail..... because they don't actual fix the underlying problem.

What is the underlying problem?

    Software is abstract and can not be embodied in a physical form!
Therein lies a contradiction in the current applied Law:
    1) Abstract concepts are not patentable subject matter!
And
    2) Let's treat abstract concepts as physical embodiments!
One of them has to give sooner or later or the problems will remain.

Given the second principle exists only because fast talking Lawyers managed to convince a number of individuals that software really is physical - I'd say 2 will be the one to give if nothing else changes. If Congress decides to make abstract concepts patentable and the Supreme's and President allow it - then we're (the US and anyone who wishes to do business with/in the US) all in for an even nastier time.

RAS

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • Naw ... - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, January 22 2013 @ 11:53 AM 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 )