|
|
|
|
|
|
by newishuser
4875 days ago
|
|
|
If there was ever an argument against broad software patents it's this. Also if there ever was an argument that the patent system is a money making sham, it's this. Prepending existing ideas with, "A computer-implemented method" does not make them patent-worthy and everyone in the entire world knows it. |
|
|
> Judge: Why don't we actually look at a claim? Why don't we start with claim 26 of the 375' patent. It begins, "a data processing system to enable the exchange of obligations between parties, the systems comprising: a communications controller, a first-party device coupled to said communications controller, a data storage unit having information stored, a computer coupled to said data storage unit, said communications controller that is configured to do the following"
> Judge: That doesn't just sound like somebody saying a "method" with maybe a computer, I mean there are four separate physical tangible components of a system articulated.
> Lawyer: Your Honor, you're right. There's a computer, a hard drive, and a telephone.