From: Robert Dewar <dewar@adacore.com>
To: Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org>
Cc: Richard Kenner <kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu>,
dnovillo@google.com, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, stevenb.gcc@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Wolfe patent on "assert chains"
Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2008 15:07:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48440C86.8060503@adacore.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4aca3dc20806020759g75ad6ad7kc558a44c08a65a43@mail.gmail.com>
Daniel Berlin wrote:
> I understand the problem you are facing, but the cited case (and those
> following it) make clear they do not equate "publication" with
> "technical paper", but instead "something available to the public,
> regardless of form".
It still has to be reasonably accessible to one of appropriate
skills. Surely you would not argue that machine code is sufficient,
on the grounds you could reverse engineer it to determine that it
was using somme particular arlgorithm?
>
> "interpretation of the words 'printed' and 'publication' to mean
> 'probability of dissemination' and 'public accessibility'"
>
> (note that publication is equated with public accessibility, not form
> of document
>
> If you want to argue they are not exactly on point, you could try, but
> given there is absolutely no caselaw i can find coming down that would
> support such a position, I think you would be hard pressed to find a
> judge who would not roll their eyes at you. :)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-02 15:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-02 8:50 Steven Bosscher
2008-06-02 13:05 ` Diego Novillo
2008-06-02 13:14 ` Daniel Berlin
2008-06-02 13:15 ` Robert Dewar
2008-06-02 13:47 ` Daniel Berlin
2008-06-02 13:50 ` Daniel Berlin
2008-06-02 14:06 ` Richard Kenner
2008-06-02 14:22 ` Daniel Berlin
2008-06-02 14:39 ` Richard Kenner
2008-06-02 14:56 ` Robert Dewar
2008-06-02 14:59 ` Daniel Berlin
2008-06-02 15:07 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
2008-06-02 15:24 ` Diego Novillo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=48440C86.8060503@adacore.com \
--to=dewar@adacore.com \
--cc=dberlin@dberlin.org \
--cc=dnovillo@google.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu \
--cc=stevenb.gcc@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).