William Stein wrote: > On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 1:57 PM, john_perry_usm <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Now translate it to 2009. I don't know how the law is today. My >>> question: >>> Would it be possible for (just as an example) Wolfram to get patents >>> for known algorithms *and* forbid other people to further develop >>> these algorithms? Would it be possible to get a patent on the >>> manipulate/interact feature, even though it was openly available since >>> at least 2002 or even <1999? >> My understanding is that you can't patent prior art. So even if >> Wolfram *succeeded* in patenting algorithms that are well-known, any >> suits they might file based on said patents would be dismissed the >> moment it was shown that they were based on prior art. >> >> This assumes that the defendant could afford to put up the minimal >> defense necessary, and that they would put up the minimal defense >> necessary. Such assumptions do not always bear out in practice; some >> companies submit immediately and pay out. One example I know is >> Commodore Amiga's paying a royalty for the XOR patent. Supposedly, >> this was one Commodore eventually folded: they owed on the patent, and >> a judge prohibited their importing new products to sell until they >> paid. Ironically, the XOR patent was (later) reviewed and revoked. >> >> You also can't patent "trivial" modifications to prior art. The >> modification has to be truly non-obvious. The general consensus among >> almost everything I've read, however, is that the US Patent Office has >> given up trying to figure out whether software patent applications are >> for truly novel modifications, and has decided to let the courts sort >> it out. As someone else said, this is the reason for a lot of patent >> applications: not to sue others frivolously, but to protect oneself >> from frivolous suits. >> >> IANAL, also IANAH, so I invite correction. >> >> regards >> john perry > > Let's get real about this math software patent discussion. > Mathematica, Magma, and Maple have no software patents. Matlab, on > the other hand... > > This link gives *97* (!) registered patents by Mathworks (makers of MATLAB): > > http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=mathworks&FIELD1=ASNM&co1=AND&TERM2=&FIELD2=&d=PTXT > > (click next to see 51-97). They have patents like: > > * System and method for distributing system tests in parallel > computing environments > * Programming language type system with automatic conversions > * Function values in computer programming languages having dynamic > types and overloading > In
Interestingly, though they've been around since the early 80s, all of these patents were filed between 2001 and 2007. Jason -- Jason Grout -- To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-support URL: http://www.sagemath.org
