Quote from http://www.pli.edu/patentcenter/blog.asp?view=plink&id=368 :
Here are the highlights:
* The Federal Circuit rejected the that the "useful, concrete and tangible
result" inquiry as being inadequate.
* Patentability under 101 does not depend on process steps, but rather
requires a tangible machine or transformation into a different state.
* *Software* *is* *once* *again* *unpatentable* *in* *the* *United* *States*
* In order to protect what was formerly known as patentable software we
will have to go back to claiming a machine that provides certain
functionality.
* Software patents that have been issued under the previous understanding
of the law are almost certainly now worthless.
--
http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/
linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless
registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org.
ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic
