If I have a deck of cards on the table in front of me, and that does not
infringe the patent...
... but my looking at the deck of cards and
reading them does ...
This should be clear evidence that what was
patented was pure abstract concept.
Put in the context of the
software:
If the creation of the software does not infringe the
patent
and the implementation of the software does not infringe the
patent
but the use of the software does
Then what was patented was
pure abstract concept.
Because, logically, the only way one could "avoid
using the software" during the "creation of the software" is to never test it -
not even the simple testing that comes with compiling it.
Isn't the
creation of the invention as much infringement under patent law as the
use?
And if it "must be done in conjuction with hardware" - then again:
why is the creation not infringement when the creation requires hardware in
order to compile into binary form?
Ahh... the questions where the Patent
Lawyers wave their hands and the magic forms.
Now there's a
twist:
The magic isn't in the software - all us developers know that. The
magic is in the hand-waving that the Patent Lawyers do.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
| 
