[skybrian]

Now you're nitpicking. The only reason I mentioned RPC's is as an well-known example of a specification, to contrast that with a concrete implementation.

My point is that an algorithm is more general than any particular implementation. They aren't concrete. They're abstract. (And of course if patents only covered one concrete implementation then nobody would bother getting them.)

[TylerE]

I don't think it's nitpicky. Often the bulk of the work is implementing a given algorithm efficiently, instead of just writing a formal paper with lots of hand-wavy "a sufficiently smart compiler..."

[nitrogen]

But that's not innovation or an inventive step, that's just hard labor, sweat of the brow.

"Except, of course, patents aren't about the sweat of your brow and how much work you put into something." - http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130415/16444322713/suprem...