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
Mathematical algorithm exception? | 179 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Mathematical algorithm exception?
Authored by: PolR on Monday, March 18 2013 @ 09:40 AM EDT
Were mathematicians and computer scientists to come along and say “we regard an algorithm as being something else”, such an argument would be given short shrift by judges whose ears are closed to such arguments. See also sections B1 and B2.
This is why we have the whole section A.3 dedicated to explaining what mathematicians deem to be a mathematical procedure for solving problems called an algorithm. The whole point is to establish from mathematical literature which procedures fall within the limits of the term 'algorithm' set forth in Benson. The following sections A4 and A5 explain how these algorithms are related to computer programming and general purposes computers.
And it seems abundantly clear that the judges on the CCPA and their successors on the Federal Circuit who are inspired by them had and have nothing but contempt for the “confused” opinions of the Supreme Court in Benson and Flook. There is no way that they would have considered adopting the underlying principles of these cases, and accordingly construing broadly the language of precedents for which they feel nothing but contempt. And it is clear that Judge Rich and his associates put every effort into cabining and effectively negating the precedents in those despised opinions.
There is no need to construe the terms broadly. It is sufficient to construe the term algorithm according to its true sense in mathematics and computer science. I make no statement about the intent of the CCPA and Federal Circuit. But I observe the resulting case law about software patents is dysfunctional and detached from reality. It doesn't promote innovation and harm the economy because it makes it impossible for people and businesses to clear all rights to the goods and services they produce if they involve software.

[ 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 )