[OT] Software patents no more.

[Mr Flibble]

US Judge: "Software, however, is akin to a work of literature or a
piece of music, undeniably important, but too unbounded,
i.e., too “abstract,” to qualify as a patent-eligible invention."

http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/15-1769.Opinion.9-28-2016.1.PDF

This is huge.

/Flibble

[Lynn McGuire]

Yes, this is huge. For instance, should Amazon get patent protection on
the "one-click" button ? Nice feature, I think not.

And this is not off-topic. I worry constantly about my competitors
suing me for software patents for things that we invented decades ago.
Software engineers should not have to worry about software patents.

Lynn

[woodb...@gmail.com]

Perhaps this will motivate some to move to on line services.

I have an offer to donate 16 hours/week for six months to a
project that uses the C++ Middleware Writer. More info here:

http://webEbenezer.net/about.html


Brian
Ebenezer Enterprises
http://webEbenezer.net

[Tim Rentsch]

Mr Flibble <fli...@i42.co.uk> writes:

> US Judge: "Software, however, is akin to a work of literature or a
> piece of music, undeniably important, but too unbounded,

> i.e., too ?abstract,? to qualify as a patent-eligible invention."

>
> http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/15-1769.Opinion.9-28-2016.1.PDF
>
> This is huge.

Note that this comment is not the opinion of the Court, but
only one member of the Court.

Personally I thought his reasoning was pretty awful, but I
encourage people to read it themselves and draw their own
conclusions.

Note also that another member of the Court dissented, not
(just) from this solitary opinion but from the majority
opinion for the case under consideration.