|
|
|
|
|
by girvo
4590 days ago
|
|
Love the judge's comment here: > "There is no inventive idea here," she wrote in her order.
> "Having two or more parties input preference data is not inventive.
> Matchmakers have been doing this for millennia... It is merely a
> mathematical manifestation of the underlying process behind matchmaking:
> determining good matches."
A judge that uses the "computer algorithms == maths", and uses it to shut down a shitty patent? Awesome! I wish there were more judges like Judge Denise Colt. Well done. |
|
A good portion of such patents could've been banned with the new bill against patent trolls, if only companies like Microsoft and IBM wouldn't have lobbied so hard against such reform.