Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.org.eff.talk:9519 misc.int-property:604 comp.unix.bsd:6738 Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!virtualnews.nyu.edu!brnstnd From: brnstnd@nyu.edu (D. J. Bernstein) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property,alt.suit.att-bsdi,comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: Patents: What they are. What they aren't. Other factors. Message-ID: <20605.Oct1800.43.5892@virtualnews.nyu.edu> Date: 18 Oct 92 00:43:58 GMT References: <1992Oct6.182846.21881@netcom.com> <11828.Oct1103.34.4392@virtualnews.nyu.edu> <1992Oct12.185033.11807@panix.com> Organization: IR Lines: 15 In article <1992Oct12.185033.11807@panix.com> oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) writes: > Then it could easily happen that both patents issue. Thank you for taking the bait, Carl. The situation I described is what happened with the two LZW patents. You correctly understood the situation. Both patents were issued. Unfortunately the IBM patent *is* prior art for the Unisys patent. This is not immediately obvious, and in fact *there is no reliable way* for a patent examiner to figure this out, because mental processes are not determined by their physical effects. This is the fundamental problem with mental process patents. ---Dan