Non-mathematical patents

Posted Jun 6, 2009 11:08 UTC (Sat) by man_ls (guest, #15091)
In reply to: Non-mathematical patents by bojan
Parent article: Donald Knuth: Mathematical Ideas, or Algorithms, Should Not Be Patented (Groklaw)

"Flour" is an abstract concept, just as "1" or "0x7F" or "if (x == y)". When implementing the recipe I can use wheat flour of many different types and brands, but I can also use corn, rye or other flours. As to the recipe I can use different substitutes for ingredients (not maybe for flour, but for eggs, sugar or butter). I can omit things like salt or sugar, and put some of my own (ginger, almonds).

There is no such thing as a "concrete concepts"; concepts are by definition abstract. True, there are some which are more abstract than others; "happiness" is undoubtedly more abstract than "flour".

The application of this reasoning to software patents is straightforward. Software patents (or algorithms for that matter) rely on some concrete aspects, and some abstract ones. Also, some algorithms are more abstract than others. But usually (not always) algorithms are not patented; applications of algorithms to problems are. The RSA patent is for a "Cryptographic communications system and method", not a generic algorithm for composing numbers that cannot be factored. In contrast, the LZW algorithm was patented not only for GIF images but for any application.