|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Darren New <dne### [at] san rr com> 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
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |