Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!emory!utkcs2!nall
From: nall@cs.utk.edu (John Nall)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: Reusing Minix Source
Keywords: bad news
Message-ID: <1991Apr24.172204.6557@cs.utk.edu>
Date: 24 Apr 91 17:22:04 GMT
References: <2410@tuvie.UUCP> <1991Apr24.132201.29077@cs.utk.edu> <1991Apr24.164057.20338@agate.berkeley.edu>
Sender: usenet@cs.utk.edu (USENET News Poster)
Organization: University of Tennessee, Knoxville - CS Department
Lines: 26

In article <1991Apr24.164057.20338@agate.berkeley.edu> dc@caveat.berkeley.edu (Dave Cottingham) writes:
>In article <1991Apr24.132201.29077@cs.utk.edu> nall@cs.utk.edu (John Nall) writes:
>>So far as algorithms go, my understanding is that you CAN't patent them.
>>But of course you can copyright a particular implementation of one.
>>
>
>I wish it were so, but it ain't.  The US Patent Office has been
>issuing software patents like crazy for about five years now.  Are

Huh?  Do we have a communications problem here?  I never said one cannot
patent software!

In all honesty, I'll have to concede that I am  not completely up to 
date in the field.  I did a law review article on it a number of years
ago, but things have changed since then.  So I will slink away and leave 
the field to others who may be more aware of the current state of affairs.





-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Nall, Comp. Sci. Dept. | "MY Personal Best?  Oh, let me think a moment. 
Univ of Tenn at Knoxville   |  I think perhaps the time I read the entire
nall@cs.utk.edu             |   set of Travis McGee books over a weekend."