🚀 go-pugleaf

>>>>> On 25 Feb 91 20:55:53 GMT, waters@nddsun1.sps.mot.com (Mike
>>>>> Waters) said:
[ some stuff deleted... ]
Mike> While picking on the big guys, how about going after Technowledge Inc.
Mike> for pat no. 4,648,044 on basic AI techniques, IBM for pat. no 4,646,250
Mike> on the "Data Entry Screen", and of course Rene'K. Pardo and Remy Landau
Mike> for U.S. pat no. 4,398,249 which covers all of the spreadsheet programs
Mike> (and was issued Aug. 9, 1983)?

Mike> Frankly I fail to see why getting paid for original work is so upsetting
Mike> to some people.

There is nothing wrong with paying people for original work.  However,
these patents are utterly rediculous.  I have heard that one company
(perhaps it is Technowledge) has a patent on the backward chaining
expert system.  Give me a break.  This is a standard technique that
has been used for years and is taught in virtually every AI text.
Heck, I've written backward chaining expert systems --- should I start
worrying that some lawyer is going to contact me?

A patent on the data entry screen?  Well, of course, no one except IBM
could ever think of something so complex and so obviously a black art.
God.

Software patents could, IMHO, serve a usefull purpose.  However, they
should be given out judiciously.  How many programmers would grant a
patent on XOR or a "data entry screen"?  C'mon.

And since I personally can't afford the $10k it would cost to get a
single patent search, I'm not really likely to go hunting next time I
write an expert system that uses X as its interface and happens to use
a data entry screen to get information from the user.

Just my $0.02 worth.

Tom

--
                                      Tom Emerson
________________   Student Systems Programmer - EMBA Computer Facility
 /  /_) /_  /_                    University of Vermont
/  / \ /__ /__                     tree@newton.uvm.edu 
            What can you say about a society that says God is
                         dead and Elvis is alive?