That anti-patent pamphlet I mentioned
Arnoud Galactus Engelfriet
galactus at stack.nl
Fri Dec 13 13:43:02 UTC 2002
Xavi Drudis Ferran wrote:
> El Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 01:06:56PM +0100, Arnoud Galactus Engelfriet deia:
> > I don't know that. Manipulating EM signals seems like using forces
> > of nature in a controllable manner.
> It depends. If the manipulation is ADC + multiplying by two in an FPU + DAC,
> I say it isn't, we already know how to build circuits for that,
> and we know what happens to a signal multiplied by two.
But surely I am still using forces of nature in a controllable
manner, even if my use is entirely known???
> If you discover a new quartz crystal that will changed phase of
> signal by 10% then it's probably patentable.
Ok, but if I program a DSP chip to realize the same phase change
it is not patentable? Why? What is the difference in effect
produced by these two things?
Arnoud Engelfriet, Dutch patent attorney - Speaking only for myself
Patents, copyright and IPR explained for techies: http://www.iusmentis.com/
More information about the Discussion