Newsgroups: trial.misc.legal.software
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!maytag!looking!brad
From: brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton)
Subject: Re: Patents (was Re: Copyrights)
Organization: Looking Glass Software Ltd.
Date: Sat, 04 Aug 90 03:17:21 GMT
Message-ID: <1990Aug04.031721.23238@looking.on.ca>
References: <1990Jul27.014947.19528@hellgate.utah.edu> <>> <MERNST.90Jul27145740@emu.lcs.mit.edu> <rodney.649107377@dali.ipl.rpi.edu> <2096:Jul2900:53:4390@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <MERNST.90Jul28233614@emu.lcs.mit.edu> <9492@goofy.Apple.COM> <1990Aug01.022905.26807@l <KOLENDER.90Aug3152624@siam.ics.uci.edu>

I fail to see the difference between in the human mind and outside the
human mind.  I can envison many patented physical processes and devices
in my mind, and even perform gedankenexperimenten with them.

Likewise I can implement computer algorithms in real world hardware.

If Gauss could patent gaussian elmination (and he couldn't if you could
really do it in your head without having been told how in advance) so what?
The patent would have expired long ago.   Many other things have been
patented with exactly the same constraints.

No, a process, mechanism and algorithm are the same, and they should be
treated the same.  Patent them all or patent none.
-- 
Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Waterloo, Ontario 519/884-7473
