[Patents] On GPL Ideas and Limited Software Patentability

[orre@nada.kth.se (Roland Orre)]

First a war-ning, some of my computer systems were attacked last
night. I still don't know if YOU, whoever it was, found anything
useful, if you had hoped to find the artificial intelligence
algorithm I intend to patent in US, both as an algorithm and as a
business model, I can assure you that you will not find the brief
summary to be so useful, if you accidentaly got your hands on that.
As I could see from the traces you have only visited a small
fraction of the computers where I have information stored.

The summary of the algorithm I wrote is quite useless for those
people, who don't have my 20 years experience of software design,
knowledge engineering, neural networks, data mining, Bayesian
statistics and complex pattern finding in large data sets as
well as some biology.

I would say to access the information given by that summary
you need a key, you need my mind as an interpreter, otherwise
it's just a piece of text if you are not very clever.

I also said that I will patent this algorithm, as the US patent
system forces me to do that, but if you think that I will patent
the algorithm in a form which is useful for anyone, then you are
wrong.

I intended to release this algorithm according to the GPL license
to be used in the public good and to endorse the free creativity
and fair business competition. I intended to release it to all
the clever programmers in the open software community, but at
the moment I will only release small fragments of the algorithm.
The whole algorithm will be kept secret as long as there is
general software patentability anywhere.

The algorithm will be used in a idea mining project I'm setting
up, where ideas, solutions and knowledge will be administrated and
generated for the public good. All people, companies as well as
curious and creative individuals will be able to participate
in the project as long as they are against software patents.

I the long run I intend to let the management of the idea base system
be administrated by patent offices and universities, who have the
best experience in treatment of ideas, designs and knowledge, but as
long as there exist a risk that ideas, algorithms and software in
general can be patented, patent offices will be excluded.

The computer system will be distributed all over Europe, to begin
with, but in the long run all over the world except USA, which will
be excluded as the US allow for general patentability of ideas and
software. To setup the systems there I consider a security risk, as
long as the US system allow patentability of ideas and software.

The complete artifical intelligence algorithm will not run anywhere.
I will only allow fragments of it to run on a particular computer,
so anyone breaking in to a computer system will not gain any useful
information about the algorithm.

Now, as long as there exist patentability of ideas and software
anywhere in the world, I will not release the algorithm anywhere,
only fragments, which will be run on separate computers. Each
computer will communicate with other computers in non obvious
ways for any human being so it will be non trivial to identify
how the algorithm works.

Ideas generated from the data base will be copyrighted according
to GPL, so everyone can take part of them and utilize them for
their business in fair competition with other companies.

Regarding the question about what to do with generated solutions
which can be proven to be already patented. As the artifical
intelligence algorithms which have generated these new solutions can
be seen as a new, non human being, I don't consider the patentability
laws to apply to these. All ideas and fundamental solutions which
are entered into the database are assumed to be patentfree.

This idea generation database system is setup to be an inspiration
for the free creativity and free fair competition. I will later
describe further details about how the model for fair competition
works, with GPL ideas, as this may not be obvious for everyone.

You will not get access codes to the computers if you are pro
software patents, for companies as well as individuals, as software
patents promote monopoly, slows down the technical development
speed and harm the free enterprise.
----------------------------------
Now, considering my previous suggestion to Mr Gregory Aharonian
about limited patentability for software it seems as Mr Aharonian
has chosen another way than I had hoped for, as he still claims
that software should be patentable, ignoring my suggestion
about a compromise.

I had suggested a limitation to the patentability of software
so software can be seen as an extension of the machine concept,
but where e.g. artificial intelligence algorithms can not be
patented.
Business ideas should not be patentable.

My suggestion was:

(1) Machine:
        A device which can perform certain predefined tasks.
        A device is composed of atoms and molecules.

(2) Computer:
        A machine which can perform certain predefined tasks
        according a predefined recipe in form of instructions,
        i.e. one predefined software, using predefined clearly
        specified variables or registers to store state information.
        Using no dynamic memory, no stack, no recursion and
        no computed go to. (includes e.g. VHDL designs)

(3) Computer system:
        A computer with a general stack and heap which can use extra
        memory for replaceble software and extra scratch pad memory
        which can be used differently for different software programs.

(4) Intelligent system:
        A computer system which can modify its own software and
        memory usage over time to allow it to utilize empirical
        knowledge for adapting its actions.

where only software according to (2) could possibly be patented
as an extension to the machine concept which avoids e.g.
intelligent systems to be patented.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Considering the attack on my computers I have no proof against
anyone, so I can not claim that anyone from the software patent
maffia in USA or Europe have been attacking my computers.

As you certainly are a clever man Mr Aharonian, I would suggest you
to reconsider my suggestion about limited software patentability.
----------------------------------
I will patent the artificial intelligence algorithm in USA, because
your current laws force me to do that, but I will of course not
patent it in my name, and I will only patent it in small fragments,
where each fragment will be useless for understanding how the
algorithm works.

As time goes by we will have covered all ideas which can lead you to
create an artificial intelligence as well as business schemes based
upon the same principle.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, Mr Gregory Aharonian, I ask you again, do you want to be
remembered in the future US history as the one who forced me to
patent this algorithm in US or the one who tried preventing me to
patent the algorithm?

You have of course many choices of action, but I would suggest that
you don't do me any harm, as you know that I will then become
stronger, as the seed is now sown towards a true world without
borders, limitations and contradictions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The action I would suggest is that you Mr Aharonian, works towards
stopping or limiting software patents according to my suggestion.

Another less constructive policy would possibly be that you yourself
patent all ideas which may possibly lead to an artificial intelligence.
I think most people would not like that idea...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, the choice is yours and others, Mr Aharonian.

    Best regards
    Roland Orre