Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:01:32 01/08/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 08, 2004 at 10:37:05, David Dory wrote: >On January 08, 2004 at 09:34:24, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On January 08, 2004 at 02:27:18, Mr j smith wrote: >> >>>Will the USPTO accept the challenge ? Tune in tomorrow !!! >> >> >>They haven't accepted the challenge at all. >> >>One classic. Someone patented a _program_ that simply transposed music >>from one key to another. Even though that is a direct mathematical >>transformation, even though it has been known since early musical instruments >>were made and music written, etc. Yet that "idea" is patented. Of course, >>most of these new electronic keyboards can transpose from one key to another >>automatically, and no patent infringement suit based on this patent has ever >>been won by the patent holder. But that didn't stop the patent office from >>issuing the patent. The "Peter Principle" once again. > >Sorry Mr. Hyatt, even our patent office won't allow a patent of an idea. A >specific way to transform music from one key to another, OK - but not an idea. > >Dave In this case "idea" is the right term. And it was patented. And it was kicked out multiple times in court cases. We might quibble about the definition of "idea" here, but that is the best that can be said about this. Perhaps "algorithm" might be another nebulous term. I wonder who holds the patent for the algorithm "quick-sort"? :)
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.