[Patents] mental acts x software

[Fred Mobach fred@mobach.nl]

Steve Probert wrote :

> >Following your reasoning the compress algorithms could (in theory) also be
> >reproduced by mental acts,
> 
> I disagree.  I've been thinking hard about the data on my hard drive, 
> but I simply cannot make it shrink by just thinking about it.  Therefore, 
> it is not a mental act.

It might be simpler to think of your library, those books on the
shelves. Compressing those texts means you need a pencel, some paper and
your brains. When compressing your library, are you infringing on a
patent or not ? I think not. And don't tell me that it is impossible, it
just takes some of my time.

> >...the difference beteween the two methods is that the compress algorithms
> >are more complex, and can only be implemented by computers. So,
> >according your argument: easy mental acts can not be patented and
> >difficult mental acts can be patented, write?
 
> Wrong.  The difference has nothing to do with the degree of difficulty, 
> but rather to what is being done.  The mathematical theory underlying a 
> compression algorithm is not patentable, but a data compression routine 
> that uses the same mathematical theory to compress data could well be 
> patentable.  This is true whether the mathematical theory is easy or hard.

In case I would bother to write another routine to implement the same
algorithm I am not infringing that patent ? I am afraid that your answer
will be : no, you are infringing.

This is not a valid reasoning according to my presumption that doing it
on a piece of paper is not an infringement of a patent. Otherwhise, quod
licet Iovi non licet bovi.

Regards,

Fred

-- 
Fred Mobach - fred@mobach.nl - postmaster@mobach.nl
Systemhouse Mobach bv - The Netherlands - since 1976
/"\
\ /
 X  ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN
/ \ AGAINST HTML MAIL