re: NAFTA mandates software patents - opposing viewpoints welcome

[David Farber <farber () central cis upenn edu>]

Mitch Goodkin is a lawyer with the IP Office of the University
of Michigan


------- Forwarded message


Date: Mon, 1 Nov 93 09:00:54 EST
From: mitch.goodkin () um cc umich edu
Subject: NAFTA mandates software patents - opposing viewpoints welcome


The message below continues a major unnecessary confusion.  The issue is not
"software patents."  That term should not be used.  It obscures the issues.
The real issue is what processes should be patentable.  Patent law allows
for patents on processes.  It is irrelevant whether the process is done by
hand, by special hardware or by a programmable device given directions by a
computer program.


The continued use of the term "software patents" implies a conclusion,
rather than fostering an objective discussion of the boundaries of which
processes should be patentable.


Suppose one had a new method for making steel.  The method defines the
materials to use, the relative portions of the materials, and the sequences
and timing for the materials to be put into a blast furnace.  The method
might be implemented by an automatic material handling system, in which a
computer progam ("software") directs the selection and sequencing of
materials from bins, the weighing of the materials, and the timing of
putting the materials into the furnace.  The fact that a computer program is
used to control this process is not relevant to the issue as to whether or
not this process should be patentable.


Suppose that one has a new method for improving the manner in which access
to a computer memory is allocated and controlled.  Patentability should not
rest on whether or not the method is implemented by special hardware or by
"software" microcode.