🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1991Aug01.021644.1821@wsrcc.com> wolfgang@wsrcc.com (Wolfgang S. Rupprecht) writes:
> I find this note interesting on several grounds, the most interesting
> one is that it doesn't even work!  Monte Carlo indeed.

I think that was just meant as a summary that the public could
understand. Of course, it's a lot easier to explain the 2-D case; trying
to jump to 3-D is silly.

Note that my proposed mental process regulations would prevent this
patent. The calculation itself is a mental process, as it can (in
principle) be carried out within one's head. (This is the sort of thing
that lawyers love to prove in court... ``Okay, Mr. Smith, you say that
the program listed here [riffle riffle] isn't a mental process. May I
ask you, Mr. Smith, if you are given X and Y, can you calculate X * Y in
your head? ... Thank you. Now can you compute X * Y + Z in your head?''
and so on through the program until everyone listening gets the point.)
Hence the calculation performed upon a computer is also a mental
process, and as such is not patentable.

The proposed regulations are attached for any readers who may have
missed them during the previous discussion.

---Dan

Statement of Proposed Mental-Process Patent Regulations
Daniel J. Bernstein
July 5, 1991

I support the adoption of the following definitions and resolutions
into statute or regulation.

	A mental process per se is not statutory subject matter for a
	patent. The term ``mental process'' includes, but is not limited
	to, any process which may be carried out within a person's mind.
	The term ``mental process'' includes, but is not limited to, any
	method by which a set of numbers or symbols is computed from a
	different set of numbers or symbols. The term ``mental process''
	includes, but is not limited to, a mathematical algorithm. The
	term ``mental process'' includes, but is not limited to, a
	mental process performed with the aid of a computer. The term
	``mental process'' includes, but is not limited to, any
	combination of mental processes.

	A mental process applied in a non-essential manner to physical
	elements is not statutory subject matter for a patent. A mental
	process limited to a particular technological environment is not
	statutory subject matter for a patent. A mental process combined
	with data-gathering steps which merely determine values for
	variables used in the process is not statutory subject matter
	for a patent. The combination of a mental process with a process
	or product which is not statutory subject matter for a patent
	is not statutory subject matter for a patent. A product defined
	by its result or function, when that result or function is also
	the result or function of a mental process, is not statutory
	subject matter for a patent.

	Use of a mental process per se cannot infringe upon a patent.
	Use of a mental process with the aid of a computer or partially
	or entirely carried out upon a computer cannot infringe upon a
	patent.