|
|
|
|
|
|
by TheDong
1595 days ago
|
|
|
Algorithms are not meant to be patentable, per alice[0], but that does not mean they are not patentable in practice. The theoretical intent of what is patentable certainly differs from what is enforcible as a patent in practice. LZW compression[1] was patented, and Unisys actually had success extracting license fees with it[2]. In that sense, clearly an algorithm was "patented enough" that the patent was granted and used, even though the patent is literally just math. The MP3 patent is also just a mathematical algorithm which had even more legal success. So, while technically algorithms are not patentable, in reality, the USPTO will grant patents for algorithms if you write enough legal gunk around them, and the difference doesn't really matter when a patent troll is sending threatening emails and your lawyers are demanding 20x the licensing fee to take the case. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Corp._v._CLS_Bank_Intern... [1]: https://patents.google.com/patent/US4558302A/en [2]: https://www.itweb.co.za/content/JBwErvn5oNOq6Db2 |
|
|