undefined | Better HN

0 pointsrayiner12y ago0 comments

Take, for example, IBM's patents on alias analysis. You can't patent the abstract concept of alias analysis, even if you describe how to do it in very generic terms on a computer. However, you can probably patent Steensgard's specific, near-linear-time algorithm for doing so: http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/pingali/CS380C/2007fa/papers/....

0 comments

4 comments · 2 top-level

sanxiyn12y ago· 2 in thread

Why wouldn't Steensgaard's algorithm be an abstract idea?

There is a difference, since unlike hedging (Bilski) and clearing house (Alice Corp) it is a novel abstract idea. But it is still an abstract idea, and logically, should not be patentable.

Stålmarck's algorithm is a similar case. Can't argue it is not novel, but 100% abstract. Parabix is another.

rayinerOP12y ago

I tend to think of these things as an engineer, rather than a mathematician. A mathematician will say that all algorithms are abstract ideas. I tend to think that "alias analysis" is the abstract idea, while Steensgaard's algorithm is a specific, concrete way of implementing the idea with desirable properties and trade-offs.

Tyr4212y ago

Then, are mergesort and quicksort both patentable as specific, concrete ways of implementing the idea of sorting with desirable properties and trade-offs?

DannyBee12y ago

This is a bad example, because the actual steensgaard patents are highly generic.

But your general point holds :)

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse