[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]
(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec)
(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
- From: phm@a2e.de (PILCH Hartmut)
- Subject: [Patents] patents on ITU-proposals (g.723.1)
- Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 18:52:27 +0100 (CET)
> Sorry, but if you are going to assert such unsubstantiated reasoning,
> you leave me no choice but to point out to that most people on both
> sides of the atlantic, that most clear concepts of technical invention
> include software patents. I like the thought that software turns a
> general purpose machine into a specific purpose machine, the
> combination of which always achieves a technical effect.
There is only one concept of technical invention, i.e. the one elaborated
in most detail by German courts in the 70/80s. Considerations of
"technical effect" have no place in that concept.
Judging from your earlier writings I had thought you had made some
progress, but I must withdraw that conclusion, I fear.
For reading on "technical invention", refer to
http://swpat.ffii.org/stidi/korcu/
--
Hartmut Pilch http://phm.ffii.org/
Protecting Innovation against Patent Inflation http://swpat.ffii.org/
95000 signatures against software patents http://www.noepatents.org/
(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.
(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)