[Patents] Re: [Fwd: Dispositionsprogramm decision translated]

[phm@a2e.de (PILCH Hartmut)]

> > Viterbi algorithm (Fed. Pat Ct., 1996) "a generalised viterbi algorithm
> > (known sequence of steps for signal processing) for receiving signal
> > transmitted through a noisy channel". Known algorithm being applied in
> > specific way using specific equipment. Held: not an algorithm per se but, 
> > by
> > virtue of careful limitation in claim, an algorithm having technical
> > content. Therefore, patentable subject matter and, on novelty, new use of
> > known thing.
>
> This of course destroys both the concept of technical invention and
> to a claim ...

Sorry, this text is messed up.  It must read:

This of course destroys both the concept of technical invention and the
law-conformance of BGH caselaw, because the claim is de facto directed to
a computer program as such:  by writing and selling a computer program as
such you will be deemed to be infringing (at least contributorily), and by
adding an non-inventive materialisation step, namely the execution of the
program on the computer, you will be directly infringing on the claim.

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