|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 08:50 PM EDT |
Can we make logical switches with those other examples? I find myself unable to
do so without it just being "use an electrical circuit to...", but
then if I didn't know about electrical computers I would have much the same
problem with electricity so I could easily be missing something.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, May 11 2013 @ 10:05 PM EDT |
I stated that the only thing being patented when you patent software is the
electrical flow. You responded with:
That's all that's patented in
any electronic circuit
If you're talking software - absolutely! So
it seems we agree on the breadth of my statement after all.
However, if
you mean:
When you patent a circuit, providing a blueprint, you patent the
electrical flow through that circuit!
Then I disagree!
You claim the
algorithm could be easily implemented by toggles. Do you honestly believe if
the Supremes were reviewing a patent that laid claim to:
The existing device
(already patented elsewhere) with toggle 1 in an up position. Same device with
toggle 2 in a down position....
That they'd agree you have patentable
subject matter?
How about an RC copter with the on-off switch? Are you
saying you can patent that copter, then patent the device with the switch on,
then patent the device with the switch off?
I don't think the Supremes
would agree with such a conclusion.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Wol on Sunday, May 12 2013 @ 03:04 PM EDT |
No that's not.
Patenting a physical circuit is perfectly okay - a particular arrangement of
switches, capacitors, resistors, whatever.
That's patenting a circuit board, or a silicon chip, or or or. What is NOT
patentable (even if silly patents are granted thereon) is any configuration of
switches or current flow or suchlike WITHIN that circuit board.
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
