[Patents] monopoly/publicity contradiction?

[Steve Probert steve.probert@patent.gov.uk]

PILCH Hartmut wrote:
> To describe a program "invention" accurately, you need to describe it in a
> formal language, which can be executed on a computer. 

Not at all.  In the majority of cases a description in plain language is
much clearer and far more effective.

> Programs have a dual nature, which defies the normal distinction between
> monopoly and publicity.
> Do you understand the point now?

No.  But not for want of effort on your part, or mine.

> Wrong: 
> poorer in the sense that the easiest and most economic method of
> performing the "invention" would not be patented

I disagree; and again, I think we'll just have to agree to differ.

 

-- 

Steve Probert
Deputy Director
The Patent Office