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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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
You're allowed to be incorrect | 457 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
A privilege that I all-too-frequently exercise.
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 07 2013 @ 09:27 PM EDT
... and may be exercising in this discussion, but so be it.

I'm just a computer applications developer with over 20 years experience, so my
legal opinions are woefully unqualified.

You see a "structure" in your proposed algorithm, I see applied
mathematics; however, we've wandered far afield of the functional claiming
112(f) topic, and I seriously doubt we'll find any common ground upon which to
agree as we approach 101 territory.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

You're allowed to be incorrect
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 08 2013 @ 09:15 AM EDT
No. HOW do you determine frequency domain? Without that,
the patent cannot be implemented. Patent fail.

Yes, I want it exact - as in if we allow software patents (I
wouldn't), then source code MUST be included, and what is
patented is that source code - no pseudocode, actual, working
compilable source code (note I also want models for hardware
patents). Oh, and that source code loses copyright
protection by going into the patent - you don't get two
protections for one.

[ 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 )