Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!purdue!decwrl!labrea!polya!shap
From: shap@polya.Stanford.EDU (Jonathan S. Shapiro)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Jonathan (Apple patents)
Message-ID: <8482@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 16 Apr 89 00:38:39 GMT
References: <530@umiami.miami.edu> <7423@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <16381@cup.portal.com> <7483@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <6806@saturn.ucsc.edu> <1476@wasatch.UUCP> <1833@ucsfcca.ucsf.edu> <3767@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>
Sender: Jonathan S. Shapiro <shap@polya.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: shap@polya.Stanford.EDU (Jonathan S. Shapiro)
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 11

In article <3767@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu> bmartin@uhccux.UUCP (Brian Martin) writes:
>
>I was at a seminar on patents and copyrights last night, given by a patent
>attorney. According to him, algorithms can't be patented.

Technically correct but pragmatically misleading.  Algorithms cannot
be patented, but implementations of algorithms can, under a "method
patent". By making the claims of the patent as general as possible,
the algorithm can effectively be protected.

Jon