[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Articles:Patenting Your Computer's Inventions
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Articles:Patenting Your Computer's Inventions
- From: Kristian Köhntopp <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 13:30:11 +0100
- Comment: This message comes from the debate mailing list.
- Organization: NetUSE GmbH
- Sender: email@example.com
Chess and patents (Score:4, Interesting)
by sreeram (firstname.lastname@example.org) on 0:44 26th November, 1999 CET (#9)
I have always wondered about Chess players patenting some of their moves. To me, it
appears that they could satisfy all the requirements for patentability.
(1) Occasionally, a brilliant GM might discover a move that has never been documented
before - qualifies as having no prior art.
(2) The move might be sophisticated enough that it is not obvious to a lot of good Chess
players, let alone the commoners - qualifies as being non-obvious.
(3) The move is after all a process, a design - qualifies for a "method" patent.
So, what happens then? You can't ever play that move unless you license it? Whoa.
I was thinking about that supposedly remarkable move that Deep Blue played against
Kasparov in Game Four of their rematch - which even Kasparov admitted showed signs of
the machine's "intelligence". Would IBM have been able to patent it (if they had
applied for one before someone documented the game)?
Kristian Köhntopp, NetUSE Kommunikationstechnologie GmbH
Siemenswall, D-24107 Kiel, Germany, +49 431 386 436 00
Using PHP3? See our web development library at
http://phplib.netuse.de/ (We have moved! Update your bookmarks!)