And thank you Bruce (and Steve) :-) I love that list on time 8:20 in the film. The two middle ones are on my list of US problems with their system. These are two of the reasons why the problem is not as large in Europe.
Yes, every progress is a mix of old thoughts. Let me tell how we think about progress around here when it comes to protection: Why have what we call a "problem-solution approach". You have a problem? Yes Has anyone else solved it? No Was it easy to solve? Well... Then we come to the discussion, but the discussion is fairly easy to follow because it relates to how a person having the problem would think if he knew about everything already published in the field. The general rule is that if you combine two publications it is easy. More then that may be discussed. We also distinguish between stuff known from books in school and stuff known from less known publications. This works well for most fields and tries to base the protection on how the inventor should think, not their lawyers. In what most people think of as software software it may be very difficult, simply because the patent system is not able to find out what is known in the "technical field". Software people tend to publish by just telling about it, or spreading the program. So it is impossible for the patent examiner to know what was known when the invention was made. He does not know it the problem has been solved already. So software patent may very easily end up as the song writers in the lecture, the inventor does not remember (or acknowledge) his inspiration and it is very difficult for anybody else to find out. I love working with creative people, I know a lot about how they work, and they definitely borrow ideas, but the best of them change the ideas to something great. Sometime this change earns a reward, or need it in order to come to market in order to help people. Like a system I recently worked on trying to detect single molecules in a fluid such as a blood stream. A combination of known ideas no one had made before. DagT Den 1. sep. 2012 kl. 22:14 skrev Bruce Walker: > Yes, thank you Dag. > > At the risk of fanning the faint embers of this thread, here's an > extremely entertaining TED talk (just under 10 minutes) about > creativity, and how it comes from without, revealing that nothing is > original. Illustrated with Dylan songs and Apple's Multitouch. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zd-dqUuvLk4 > > Disclaimer: my own name is attached as inventor on two software > patents. One I thought was quite silly and spurious, but I played > along for the sake of the company. The other I'm quite proud of as a > very novel idea. So I've seen both sides myself. > > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 5:25 PM, steve harley <p...@paper-ape.com> wrote: >> >> on 2012-08-29 16:03 DagT wrote >> >>> >>> OK, I think my last word here is that my work is helping small firms >>> protect their inventions. >> >> >> that explains it! >> >> thanks for a good conversation, Dag; you obviously have much more depth >> than me in this area, and a lot more riding on it professionally; it has >> kept me on my toes to respond to you, and i will remember your points >> >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > > > > -- > -bmw > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
