Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> > 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.

> That's the same rules we have here in the USA.

  Clearly it isn't. Something like patenting LZW would never happen here.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message