From phm@a2e.de  Tue Nov 28 09:42:20 2000
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 10:42:20 +0100 (CET)
From: PILCH Hartmut phm@a2e.de
Subject: [Patents] ABstracts to articles on hardware/software codesign

>     I have repeatedly referred to the existence of hardware/software
> codesign tools as part of a basis for requiring that hardware and
> software equally be patentable (or not patentable).  

And you always refused the counter-arguments which were reiterated many
times because you reiterated your long-refuted arguments many
times.  Which is why calling you a troll is just an objective statemnt of
fact.

Thanks nonetheless to your hints to the literature, which, although not
very relevant for this discussion, are certainly interesting nonetheless.

>     A hardware and software co-design method for the image processing
> system of intelligent transport systems (ITS) is proposed. The objective
> of this method is to optimize the division of functions between hardware
> and software by the optimum tradeoff. In this method, the targeted overall
> system is first modeled by software, and then functions and structures are
> adjusted. The performance of each function of software and hardware in the
> model is evaluated by simulation, and the optimized division of functions
> between hardware and software is obtained. Each functionally divided
> process of hardware and software is re-designed and fine-tuned and then
> operations are verified by the co-design test board in order to quickly
> design and construct a system which satisfies the design objectives. The
> ITS image processing development area is chosen as an application example
> for this method and its effectiveness is verified by evaluating the
> construction of a safe driving support system.

Which just shows that the hardware here is a medium of software
programmation, with everything based on a known simulation model of
natural forces and therefore not inventive in the sense of the patent
system as it has been understood in Europe before in the mid eighties
people started expanding it into legally unchartered territories.

The traditional boundaries of the patent system are clear in the light of
co-design tools as well as pure software.  There is no economic rationale
for extending the patent system beyond those boundaries.  If this has been
done so far, it can be pushed back step by step.

-phm





