scott wrote:
>>>   The fact that software cannot be patented in most countries. The EU 
>>> doesn't
>>> acknowledge software patents.
>>
>> Oh, right. I didn't know that.
>>
>> Does this mean that software patents actually don't get granted? Or 
>> just that hypothetically you could go to court to have them revoked?
> 
> If it's a clear cut software-only or algorithm-only with no physical 
> application it will be rejected, in fact you'd be dumb to waste the 
> money trying to apply for a patent, no legal firm would advise you to do 
> this.
> 
> *But*, if it applies to some physical object that can actually be made, 
> then the algorithm/program *can* be patented.  For example a novel image 
> processing algorithm for improving display quality on a display is fine, 
> or a control program for a crane, that sort of thing.
> 
> As you can imagine though, there is a huge grey area in the middle, so 
> probably some things get through that wouldn't be enforceable in court.

Right. So as long as M$ describes the DirectX API as "a system for 
allowing cool programs to run on our OS and nobody else's", they can 
patent it. And then sue ReactOS for implementing it.

Post a reply to this message