[Patents] Tile cascade patent

[phm@a2e.de (PILCH Hartmut)]

> an interesting case of sotware patent: the tile and cascade resource to
> show windows, yes !EP 548646 B1, with priority date from 1991, do you
> know something before this date? what is the technical effect to show
> windows in a diferent manner? can we say that maybe it could be the same
> way that you put the cards in a casino game?

"technical effect" has two meanings:

public:  a solution to a problem that is in the realm of technology and
    therefore outside the scope of the program, i.e. the
    "technical effect of controlling a car's behavior on the road
     in reaction to road surface properties" (ABS)
EPO private: a reference to a practical application, such as "i/o device",
    "screen", "window", even as an abstract entity.

Especially when talking about "further technical effect", the EPO judges
have been referring to the public meaning.  Moreover, in statements made
before politicians, they are always careful to create the impression that
they are referring to the public meaning.  However in today's practise,
they adhere to the private meaning. Their doctrine is best explained by
one of the TBA judges:

        Mark Schar (1998): What is Technical?
        http://swpat.ffii.org/vreji/papri/jwip-schar98/

There are even patents that directly refer to programming language
constructs like Java classes or Corba objects and just patent the idea of
making these interoperable or the like.  In that case, the "technical
effect" apparently consists in the fact that data are exchanged between
two Corba objects.

Also, I am told that the Karmarkar patent on the inner point method of
linear programming has been granted by the EPO, possibly also in
combination with some "technical effects", i.e. something like the method
of addition but only in cases where the numbers are represented by apples.
Or fruits.  Or things.  Or computer memory blocks.  This is where skills
such as those of Keith Beresford come in handy and why his book "Patenting
Software under the European Patent Convention" is sold for 500 EUR or
similar.

> abstract: A method and apparatus for distinctively displaying windows on
> a computer display screen. The amount of time each of the windows on the
> display screen is active ("in focus") is monitored. Upon a command from
> the user, the windows that were active a longer length of time are
> displayed more distinctively than windows that were active a shorter
> length of time. One way of displaying more distinctively is by placing
> the most active window in the upper left corner of the screen and placing
> the rest of the windows in a descending order of activity from left to
> right and top to bottom on the screen. Another way is to cascade the
> windows, where the windows are cascaded in a descending order of activity
> from the front to the back of the window stack.

Nice.
Actually a patent lawyer here in Munich quoted this patent to me as a
proof that the EPO grants patents only on great software inventions and
not on trivial things such as "one-click".
Another patent lawyer cited the hyperlink as an example of a great
software invention worthy of patent protection.
Again, words like "non-obvious" also have a public and a private meaning.

--
Hartmut Pilch                                           http://phm.ffii.org/
Protecting Innovation against Patent Inflation        http://swpat.ffii.org/
80000 signatures against software patents         http://www.noepatents.org/