Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

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:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

so if one could use that same proces to | 709 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

so if one could use that same proces to

Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 12 2013 @ 11:28 AM EDT

cure raw milk into precision cheese in exact the same way (apart from the
material) as described in that patent, one would not infringe it ?
Because the new use is then *not* in *all* ways the same as decsribed in the
patent ?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

so if one could use that same proces to - Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 12 2013 @ 04:32 PM EDT

rehash & "as such"

Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, May 12 2013 @ 12:20 PM EDT

It could be patentable *despite* having (unpatentable) software in the total
invention.

Having software (or algorithme) inside total invention does not render total
invention unpatentable.
( and the arguement on unpatentable was based on having an algorithme ? )

Understanding correct or wrong ?

If that is the meaning of the famous "as such" clause,
and it could/would be upheld (?) (problems forseeable), then maybe it might not
be so bad. (ahem, as such)

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

I think that's right - Authored by: Ian Al on Monday, May 13 2013 @ 04:18 AM EDT

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 )