|Authored by: Wol on Saturday, March 16 2013 @ 04:51 PM EDT|
|But my thought is that if we can clearly say "this is the software bit,|
this is the hardware bit", then it becomes much easier to argue "but
THIS device cannot infringe THAT patent".
It should be clear that adding software to general purpose COTS hardware cannot
make a "new patent-infringing machine".
That's where I'm trying to go - maybe aimed more at the courts than the patent
office - but it helps enforce the importance of "what is new IN THE
HARDWARE to make a new machine?".
And it also helps the patent examiners to some extent in that they can then say
when examining the patent "the software component is in the prior art, what
is new elsewhere?".
Even a formal statement from the patent office that "COTS hardware +
software cannot create a patent-infringing machine" would be a pretty big
advance. That promptly gets all software houses off the hook for any possible
Doesn't stop them being sued, of course, but they would now be in the position
of being able to file for summary judgement as a matter of law.
Basically, this would kill "on a computer" patents stone dead...
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]