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
Well, you might understand THAT concept, but you donb't understand what is patentable. | 179 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Well Done!
Authored by: PolR on Friday, March 15 2013 @ 03:16 PM EDT
Close but not quite. It depends what you mean by computer output.

Let's take your golf club example. Suppose you use a computer to control a
machine that makes golf clubs. The referent is the golf clubs. The interpretant
is what people will think when they read the data about golf clubs.

Suppose a patent covers a method for making golf clubs. Does include the steps
of actually making the golf club? If the answer is yes the referent is included.
You may have a patentable process for making golf clubs.

But suppose the patent doesn't include that step. Then the referent is not
included. The meaning of data is only interpretants in this patent. Then the
next question is whether there is something new and nonobvious outside of the
interpretants. If the answer is no, then this is a patent on an abstract idea.
The invention is the abstract software. If the patent claim some unrelated stuff
like the computer and the machine tool this doesn't save the patent because none
of that is new and nonobvious.

But suppose the machine tool is new and nonobvious. Then the patent is saved.
You can patent a new machine tool with an embedded computer and a software
component. The key is that the interpretants cannot be the only things that are
new and nonobvious.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Well, you might understand THAT concept, but you donb't understand what is patentable.
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, March 19 2013 @ 10:35 AM EDT
35 U.S.C. 101 Inventions patentable. - Patent Laws

35 U.S.C. 101 Inventions patentable.

Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture,
or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain
a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.




35 U.S.C. 100 Definitions. - Patent Laws

35 U.S.C. 100 Definitions.

When used in this title unless the context otherwise indicates -

(a) The term "invention" means invention or discovery.

(b) The term "process" means process, art, or method, and includes a
new use of a known process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter, or
material.

(c) The terms "United States" and "this country" mean the
United States of America, its territories and possessions.

(d) The word "patentee" includes not only the patentee to whom the
patent was issued but also the successors in title to the patentee.

(e) The term "third-party requester" means a person requesting ex
parte reexamination under section 302 or inter partes reexamination under
section 311 who is not the patent owner.

What the computer does to design the golf club is carry out a process or a
method. Processes and methods fall under a category of patentable inventions.
Accordingly, the process by which the golf club is designed or built (in your
example) could be patented, if it is new and not obvious and the patent
application meets other requirements.


Also, improvements to machines are patentable. To the extent that installing
software in or allowing the machine to run software that enables the machine to
carry out its potential to design or build the golf club, the machine is
improved and that improvement is patentable.

[ 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 )