[Patents] industrial application and swpat (fwd)

[pgeller@rcf.usc.edu (Paul Edward Geller)]

Actually, my "etc." included theoretical physics, etc.  Here the problem
arises: How to distinguish these abstract structures from "inventions"?
The criterion in question -- "industriality" or "utility" -- provides some
clues, but we have seen that it gets hard to apply in hard cases.  All I
meant to say that it cannot be clarified by looking in dictionaries.  We
have to look to the purpose(s) of the criterion itself. -- Cordially, Paul

On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, Gregory Aharonian wrote:

> Seth Johnson rants:
> >.. that laying claim, in the form of patents, to math and logic
> >.. -- *ideal* and *universal* domains that are *intrinsically*
> >.. the common wealth, gift and capacity of all of humanity --
>
> As if physics, chemistry and biology are any less ideal and universal
> domains that are intrinsically the commonwealth, gift and capacity of
> humanity.  So in reality, you are against all forms of patenting.
>
> Greg Aharonian
>
> ==^================================================================
> This email was sent to: pgeller@rcf.usc.edu
>
> EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aVxiHs.a2j4t7
> Or send an email to: intprop-l-unsubscribe@topica.com
>
> T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
> http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
> ==^================================================================
>