MobileRead Forums - View Single Post

Enola · 03-17-2009, 08:02 PM

My first reaction when I heard about this was to giggle, a lot, at the irony here. My second reaction was to wonder if Discovery's patent will stand up in court. I'm definitely not a lawyer (legalese makes my eyes cross), but I do read slashdot and there's been quite a lot of discussion there about the Supreme Court ruling In re Bilski which says that "a claim to a process qualifies to be considered for patenting only if it (1) is implemented with a particular machine, that is, one specifically devised and adapted to carry out the process in a way that is not concededly conventional and is not trivial; or else (2) transforms an article from one thing or state to another."

I saw a lot of process flows, high level data flows, theoretical interfaces, but no actual circuit or mechanical diagrams. But then, i'm not a lawyer or a coder-type person who'd really understand the nuances of the diagram (and I only made it halfway through the document before I cried uncle). Of course, if you consider encrypting and transmitting a file a "transformation" it might hold (ignoring the possibility of prior art here).

Any lawyer/technical types got any insight? I'm sure there are nuances here I've missed.

03-17-2009, 08:02 PM	#23
Enola Member Posts: 22 Karma: 78 Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Virginia Device: PRS-650	My first reaction when I heard about this was to giggle, a lot, at the irony here. My second reaction was to wonder if Discovery's patent will stand up in court. I'm definitely not a lawyer (legalese makes my eyes cross), but I do read slashdot and there's been quite a lot of discussion there about the Supreme Court ruling In re Bilski which says that "a claim to a process qualifies to be considered for patenting only if it (1) is implemented with a particular machine, that is, one specifically devised and adapted to carry out the process in a way that is not concededly conventional and is not trivial; or else (2) transforms an article from one thing or state to another." I saw a lot of process flows, high level data flows, theoretical interfaces, but no actual circuit or mechanical diagrams. But then, i'm not a lawyer or a coder-type person who'd really understand the nuances of the diagram (and I only made it halfway through the document before I cried uncle). Of course, if you consider encrypting and transmitting a file a "transformation" it might hold (ignoring the possibility of prior art here). Any lawyer/technical types got any insight? I'm sure there are nuances here I've missed.