Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!accuvax.nwu.edu!tank!ra_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu
From: ra_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Jonathan (Apple patents)
Message-ID: <2734@tank.uchicago.edu>
Date: 15 Apr 89 17:29:13 GMT
Sender: news@tank.uchicago.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Chicago Graduate School of Business
Lines: 29

In article <3767@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>, bmartin@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Brian Martin) writes...
 
>In article <1833@ucsfcca.ucsf.edu> rampil@cca.ucsf.edu.UUCP (Ira Rampil) writes:
>>Yes Matilda, there are patents.  I know, I saw one.
>>It was a patent issued to Bill Atkinson representing Apple.
>>The patent covered a new algorithm for handling arbitrary
>>rasterized regions.
> 
>I was at a seminar on patents and copyrights last night, given by a patent
>attorney. According to him, algorithms can't be patented. Apparently,




Well, some of Bill's stuff is patented, and if it's an algorithm, then that
must mean algorithm's can be patented.

Anyway, just 'cause one lawyer says something, doesn't make it true.  There are
usually numerous different opinions on the law.  Sorting it out is part of what
going to court is all about.  This fellow may know what he's talking about; but
maybe not.  I'm sure if we got 10 lawyers in a room to give an opinion on this,
we'd get at least 5 different opinions.


Robert
------
ra_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu
------
generic disclaimer: all my opinions are mine