|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 10:47 AM EDT |
Reboot and rethink!
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: SilverWave on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 11:05 AM EDT |
No buts.
---
RMS: The 4 Freedoms
0 run the program for any purpose
1 study the source code and change it
2 make copies and distribute them
3 publish modified versions
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 11:23 AM EDT |
It's like saying you can't patent a rocket thruster since it is just
an accelerated blow dryer.
Except that both those entities are
tangible, physical objects of manufacture. A "calculation" is abstract and, as
such, should not be patentable in the first place. If something is not
patentable then why should a faster version of that thing become patentable?[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 11:28 AM EDT |
You suggest that person A who can throw a fastball at 90 miles per hour
qualifies for a patent on "throwing a fastball"....
... and person B
comes along later and throws a fastball at 110 miles per hour so s/he qualifies
for a patent on "throwing a fastball"...
That doesn't sound like an
absurd position to you?
Speed does matter
Your
challenge:
Please prove speed matters relative to "acquiring a
patent".
Speed is a factor in things - yes... like auto racing. But it is
not a factor in Patent Law when considering the grant of a patent. Sorry to
burst your bubble.
Your next challenge:
Since you compared a hair
drier with a rocket - please identify a single design of any hair drier that
matches a single design of any rocket!
I'm rather interested in that
comparison. Last I checked, I knew of no hair drier that used liquid chemical
mixtures in an ignited capacity to do it's task.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 12:31 PM EDT |
How can a speed break a functional barrier, in any 'inventive' sense, when the
functional parameters must be known and programmed in beforehand?
That is the whole point. A computer can do no more than what a human has
already instructed it to do. It only does it much faster. If that speed allows
production of something that would be time constrained otherwise, then well and
good, but that is still not 'invention', that's 'implementation', and
implemention is specifically what copyright is for.
And copyright is how software was traditionally (and correctly) positioned until
some clueless court decisions created a new world out of silicon 1s and 0s, and
wiped the slate on all that had come before.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 03:21 PM EDT |
The basis of patent eligible subject matter, 101:
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.
The specific point I am responding to
is:
Speed does matter
This - obviously - is in the
context of the discussion surrounding what is patent eligible subject matter.
So if "speed does matter" in deciding patent eligibility - an important question
that must be asked is:
What is the requirement under Law that calls for
speed?
There is nothing about speed in 101 - for example, it dos not
say:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful machine, speed, or
composition...
Therefore, if speed matters to patent eligibility, it must
fall within one
of:
- process
- machine
- manufacture
- composition
of matter
So what is speed?
Speed is an abstract concept wherein
the relative motion difference between two objects is identified.
For
example, if you are sitting while reading this, you have a relative speed of 0
as compared to the Earth.
Second example, still sitting you have a
relative speed of "orbit around the Sun" of approximately 107,300 km/h.
Relatively, this means you are currently traveling at a rate of 0.009% of light
speed.
So... Is speed a process? Nope! The best that can be claimed is
that speed is a calculated result from a process. The process of taking regular
measurements of the distance between two objects over time and calculating the
result.
Is speed a machine? Nope! But machines can certainly result in
the exchange of energy that results in a different measurement of speed. A
motor can turn a transmission which turns wheels, which moves an object - the
change in motion of which can be measured.
Is speed a manufacture?
Manufacture is defined as:
The making of articles on a large scale using
machinery
Nope... speed is certainly not a manufacture.
Is speed a
composition of matter? Nope! Although speed is a measurement that can be used
on a composition of matter (such as a comet) to calculate it's relative motion
to the Earth.
Since "speed" does not fall into one of four qualifications
of patent eligible subject matter - it is my humble opinion speed has absolutely
no relevance to what is patent eligible.
RAS
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: tknarr on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 04:15 PM EDT |
It's like saying you can't patent a rocket thruster since it is
just an accelerated blow dryer.
It actually isn't. A blow
dryer uses a fan to move the air, the heating elements just warm it up. A rocket
thruster uses combustion to cause the violent expansion of the fuel mixture,
then constrains that expansion to produce thrust. But yes, as a matter of fact
all rocket motors and even all jet engines are variations on that same basic
idea. The hard part, of course, isn't in what's being done but in exactly how
you do it without having the motor blow up, melt down or otherwise
catastrophically fail on you. A classic example would be the reconstruction (and
original development) of the F5 motor. 95% of the work wasn't on the basic idea,
it was on all the tricks and tweaks to get the basic idea to actually work on
the scale needed. Things like "How do you keep the bell intact, given that the
exhaust gases will be well above the melting point of the metals it's made of?".
If you can't figure out how to solve that, the basic idea is useless. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 07:21 PM EDT |
It's like saying you can't patent a rocket thruster since it is
just an accelerated blow dryer.
Huh?
It would be like saying you
*can* patent a rocket engine, because it's just like an accelerated blow dryer,
and you *can* patent a blow dryer.
Whereas a computer is just doing fast
mathematics, and since you can't patent slow mathematics, you can't patent fast
mathematics either. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 11:57 PM EDT |
I disagree. Speed may be required to make something useful, but that is a
separate criteria from whether it falls within eligible subject matter under 101
or is abstract.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
