SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
US Supreme Court rules against software patents
[Announcements] Posted Jun 19, 2014 15:10 UTC (Thu) by corbet
In April, LWN.net reported on the case of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, which addresses the issue of whether ideas implemented in software are patentable. The ruling is now in: a 9-0 decision against patentability. "We hold that the claims at issue are drawn to the abstract idea of intermediated settlement, and that merely requiring generic computer implementation fails to transform that abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention," said Justice Thomas, delivering the opinion of the Court.
From the ruling [PDF]:
Here, the representative method claim does no more than simply instruct the practitioner to implement the abstract idea of intermediated settlement on a generic computer. Taking the claim elements separately, the function performed by the computer at each step - creating and maintaining "shadow" accounts, obtaining data, adjusting account balances, and issuing automated instructions - is "[p]urely 'conventional.'" Mayo, 566 U. S., at ___. Considered "as an ordered combination," these computer components "ad[d] nothing . . . that is not already present when the steps are considered separately."
Id.,at ___. Viewed as a whole, these method claims simply recite the concept of intermediated settlement as performed by a generic computer. They do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of the computer itself or effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. An instruction to apply the abstract idea of intermediated settlement using some unspecified, generic computer is not "enough" to transform the abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday June 20 2014, @02:27AM
On your SmartTV - JoeSixpack thinks it's a TV, not a computer. Guess what? A judge will think the same.
Google self-driving cars - yes, I know: they may actually have multiple computers. Guess what? They'll still be called/considered "Smart Cars" (and a judge will do the same).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Friday June 20 2014, @02:37AM
That's when you dismantle the TV or car unit and hook its brain up to a monitor, and demonstrate that it IS a computer.
I guess what we need to reinforce is that "smart" is just a catchall for "computerized".
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday June 20 2014, @04:06AM
Some countries already [wikipedia.org] or will [eff.org] ban that.
"Did you really think the TV/car is yours to do what you please with it? What times you think you live on, 1960-ies, you hippie/woman liberation activist? Information wants what we tell it to want, or doesn't exist at all"
- Signed-
your master: the Military, Industrial, Entertainment and Congress-critters complex.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Friday June 20 2014, @05:14AM
"It's not a TV! It's an aberrant computer monitor!!"
And if that doesn't work, try:
"My car is possessed!"
(At last, that explains My Mother the Car!!)
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday June 20 2014, @05:34AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Friday June 20 2014, @07:04AM
I grok all this... Oh, I see the confusion. I didn't mean generally; I meant disassemble the SmartWhatever *for the court* as part of the case against all this SmartCrap and On-The-Internet being a special case, at such time as the whole mess gets dragged into said court.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.