Login to OSNews
Username or Email
How to fix the patent mess
on Thu 5th Jul 2012 23:07 UTC
Since I want to get this out of my system: here's a set of proposals to fix (okay, replace) the current failing patent system. No lengthy diatribe or introduction, just a raw list.
Permalink for comment 525610
To read all comments associated with this story, please
RE: Comment by yokem55
on Fri 6th Jul 2012 11:03 UTC in reply to "
Comment by yokem55
Do you have a working legal definition of a "software" patent? What exists in the US are process/method patents implemented using a computer. Some of those methods could be implemented in hardware and hardware functions can be translated and implemented in software. Where do you draw the line and what working legal definition do you use? I know it when I see it?
Well, that's easy. When someone claims said patent is infringed, and you've done the "infringing" in software, then by definition you don't infringe.
I'd say anything that is an algorithm, whether implementable by hardware or not, is implementable using software on a general purpose computer, and hence a software patent.
Sign Up For The OSNews Newsletter!
Logged in as
Change Site Theme
Friends & Fans
OSNews Privacy Statement
Notice to Bulk Emailers
© 1997-2015 OSNews Inc. All Rights Reserved. OSNews and the OSNews logo are trademarks of OSNews.
Source Code © 2007-2015,
, except where noted
Reader comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for them in any way.
All trademarks, icons, and logos shown or mentioned in this web site are the property of their respective owners.
OSNews.com uses icons from the
© 2008 John Resig
Reproduction of OSNews stories is permitted only with explicit authorization from OSNews. Reproductions must be properly credited.