Xref: utzoo misc.legal:20002 comp.edu:3423
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!intercon!ooblick
From: ooblick@intercon.com (Mikki Barry)
Newsgroups: misc.legal,comp.edu
Subject: Re: CS degrees are not "technical" degrees.....???
Message-ID: <26B08636.1C5A@intercon.com>
Date: 27 Jul 90 18:21:42 GMT
References: <8201@ccncsu.ColoState.EDU>
Organization: InterCon Systems Corporation, Sterling, VA
Lines: 20

In article <8201@ccncsu.ColoState.EDU> petersja@debussy.cs.colostate.edu (james peterson) writes:
>I find this to be curious.  Is it not the case that software can be patented?
>If software can be patented, why exclude computer scientists from the ranks
>of patent attorneys?

Because if the patent office had anyone who knew about software, or had
any patent attorneys practicing before them who knew about software, they
might actually have to THINK about the whole idea of patenting software.
BTW, you've hit one of my pet peeves here.  Patenting a subject matter
without allowing those who are knowledgeable in it to have a say about
what gets patented is something that really pisses me off.

I am in the same position.  The US Patent office wants people who have
physics, chemistry, mechanical engineering, etc. degrees.  They 
begrudgingly accepted biology as an undergraduate subject that can
qualify you for patent attorney status.  Perhaps if we push them hard
enough, CS will also be an "acceptable" discipline.

Mikki Barry
Pissed Off Law Student