|
|
|
|
|
|
by rleisti
5967 days ago
|
|
|
An invention market for software is complete BS. All the effort involved in producing a software patent can be summarized as a small amount for the idea, and most for wordsmithing. The real value comes from the implementation, which is only loosely connected to the patent; just as the relationship of any software to its initial specification. |
|
|
Suppose that I came up with a method for solving traveling salesman in O(N2). Do you really believe that the value of a package that uses that method comes mostly from things other than the method?
Subject to what happens in In Re Bilski, you can patent the application of an algorithm to a specific problem, subject to novelty and obviousness. And no, the fact that an algorithm is obviously useful for a given problem does not trigger the obviousness bar. ("bar" = obstacle to getting a patent.)