[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]

(074db819ec% subtitle %074db819ec)


(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)chronological(074db819ec% END %074db819ec) (074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Thread(074db819ec% END %074db819ec) 
(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec)
(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Reply to sender(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) (074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)to list(074db819ec%END%074db819ec)

(074db819ec% IF user.email == 'xdrudis@tinet.org' || is_owner %074db819ec) (074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)

El Mon, May 19, 2003 at 07:50:54PM +0200, taavid@hot.ee deia:
> 
> But are all these ~30000 software related patents probably illegal? 
> Including these, which are actually real "inventions" (technical 
> solutions...), but only use software? 
> 

I don't understand the question. 
You can't have a technical invention that only uses software. You need to use 
forces of nature in a new way.
Software can't use forces of nature, it can only drive machines that do. 
What definition of invention do you mean?

-- 
Xavi Drudis Ferran
xdrudis@tinet.org




(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.

(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)