Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] EVO status...was: (open-source like hardware)
From: Paul Davis (pbd_AT_Op.Net)
Date: Wed Jan 16 2002 - 02:20:50 EET
>
>> as i said, unix-like operating systems have done disk readahead for almost
>> as long as unix-like operating systems have existed (and multics
>> before them, i believe). we cannot allow nemesys/conexant to steal
>> this technology by pretending it was invented explicitly for audio. if
>> the USPTO doesn't understand this (and they probably {d,w}on't),
>
>Why not?
because in general, one can characterize a great deal of human
invention as the process of taking an idea from one domain and
applying it to another. almost every software patent is covered by
this description (those that are not probably deserve their awards
IMHO). the patent office has shown absolute willingness to issue
patents to people who take a technique applied to problem domain A and
use it in problem domain B. despite it being simple to show a complete
abstract isomorphism between the two techniques, the fact that one of
them is about operating systems and files in general and the other is
about audio and samplers and musical response times convinces the
patent office time and time again that real innovation has
occured. the idea of an abstract algorithm doesn't seem to strike the
USPTO as a compelling idea. so when someone figures out a way to
preload part of an x-ray image so that its quicker for a doctor to
display them, or preload the start of a video stream to help with
response to the "play" button, they will accept these as legitimate
innovation-by-crossing-domain-boundaries.
i think this is idiotic, but its absolutely, undeniably the way they
see the world.
what nemesys/conexant did was clever, and good. it was not, and should
never have been patentable.
--p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Jan 16 2002 - 02:12:36 EET