Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

[News] Software Might Not be Patentable Anymore (in the US)

Hash: SHA1

Microsoft fires patent broadside at Linux

,----[ Quote ]
| Due to the Bilski ruling, new software patent evaluation rules have come into 
| existence and just recently IBM lost claim to one of its database query 
| patents. It was rejected because the innovation isn’t “tied to a particular 
| machine”.   
| The BPAI goes on to justify the rejection by pointing out that the “system” 
| on which the innovation operates is “not recited in terms of hardware or 
| tangible structural elements”, which is to say that the patent is rejected 
| because the elements of the claim are “implemented solely in software or 
| algorithms”.    


Federal Circuit Bars Patent for Business 'Paradigm'

,----[ Quote ]
| "A paradigm is basically a way of doing something," Harris said. "I was 
| trying to define a whole new set of claims -- a new style of claims." 



Patents for software?

,----[ Quote ]
| The EPO does not grant patents for computer programs or computer-implemented
| business methods that make no technical contribution. Programs for computers
| as such are excluded from patentability by virtue of Art. 52(2)(c) and (3)
| EPC. According to this patent law, a program for a computer is not patentable
| if it does not have the potential to cause a "further technical effect" which
| must go beyond the inherent technical interactions between hardware and
| software.
| On the other hand, a CII (even in the form of a computer program) that can
| provide this further technical effect can be patentable, subject to the other
| patentability requirements, such as novelty and inventive step. In this case,
| it would be recognised as providing a technical solution to a technical
| problem.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index