about “trivial” software patents: the isnot casepaulk/patents/isnot-hosc.pdf · jan bergstra...
TRANSCRIPT
1Jan Bergstra & Paul Klint: About “Trivial” software patents: the IsNot case
About “trivial” software patents:the IsNot case
Jan Bergstra Paul Klint
Further info: www.cwi.nl/~paulk/patents
2Jan Bergstra & Paul Klint: About “Trivial” software patents: the IsNot case
The IsNot patent applicationabstract
● A system, method and computer-readable medium support the use of a single operator that allows a comparison of two variables to determine if the two variables point to the same location in memory.
● Application by lead developers of Microsoft's Visual Basic team
3Jan Bergstra & Paul Klint: About “Trivial” software patents: the IsNot case
The Isnot Patent application1 of 24 claims
● A system for determining if two operands point to different locations in memory, the system comprising: a compiler for receiving source code and generating executable code from the source code, the source code comprising an expression comprising an operator associated with a first operand and a second operand, the expression evaluating to true when the first operand and the second operand point to different memory locations.
4Jan Bergstra & Paul Klint: About “Trivial” software patents: the IsNot case
The IsNot Patent Applicationanalysis
● Hey, this is about != in C, Java or C#!
● Or about .NE. in Fortran
● Or about BNE in assembler
● Isn't this prior art?● Does MS really mean that they invented the
inequality operator?
5Jan Bergstra & Paul Klint: About “Trivial” software patents: the IsNot case
The IsNot Patent Applicationanalysis
● Is there some hidden intention in this application?● Is this about a hidden trick in the Basic compiler?● Is the intention to challenge the patent system?
– You must agree: this is a beauty in its simplicity
● We don't know!
We have written an Open Letter to Microsoft to clarify this, see www.cwi.nl/~paulk/patents
6Jan Bergstra & Paul Klint: About “Trivial” software patents: the IsNot case
How can we reconcile the patent system and the
Software Engineering Life Cycle?
7Jan Bergstra & Paul Klint: About “Trivial” software patents: the IsNot case
Patent Life Cycle
Granted
Revoked Rejected
Expired
Oppose Appeal
Extend License
Challenge
Apply
Max. durationreached
Act oninfringement
Patent Life cycle
= action by applicant
= action by third party
= end of life
Withdrawn
8Jan Bergstra & Paul Klint: About “Trivial” software patents: the IsNot case
Software Life Cycle
V &V = Validation and Verification
Maintenance
V & V
Testing
V & V
Implementation
V & V
Design
V & V
Requirementsengineering
V & V
Software Life Cycle
9Jan Bergstra & Paul Klint: About “Trivial” software patents: the IsNot case
Patent-aware Software Life Cycledefensive
Patent-awareSoftware Life Cycle
V &V = Validation and Verification
Maintenance
V & VPatent Validation
Testing
V & VPatent Validation
Implementation
V & VPatent Validation
Design
V & VPatent Validation
Requirementsengineering
V & VPatent Validation
10Jan Bergstra & Paul Klint: About “Trivial” software patents: the IsNot case
Patent-based Software Life Cycleoffensive
Patent-basedSoftware Life Cycle
V &V = Validation and Verification
Maintenance
V & VPatent ValidationPatent Application
Testing
V & VPatent ValidationPatent Application
Implementation
V & VPatent ValidationPatent Application
Design
V & VPatent ValidationPatent Application
Requirementsengineering
V & VPatent ValidationPatent Application
11Jan Bergstra & Paul Klint: About “Trivial” software patents: the IsNot case
IPR-based Software Life Cycleoffensive
IPR-basedSoftware Life Cycle
V &V = Validation and Verification
Maintenance
V & VIPR Validation
IPR Application?Keep secret?
Testing
V & VIPR Validation
IPR Application?Keep secret?
Implementation
V & VIPR Validation
IPR Application?Keep secret?
Design
V & VIPR Validation
IPR Application?Keep secret?
Requirementsengineering
V & VIPR Validation
IPR Application?Keep secret?
12Jan Bergstra & Paul Klint: About “Trivial” software patents: the IsNot case
Observations
● Status of prior art and claims is unclear● Software patenting badly needs input from
software engineers and is a topic for research:– formalization of prior art and claims
– inventory of all prior art related to software
– alternative patenting systems
– automatic infringement detection
● Publicly analyse and annotate software patents: Gauss project (http://gauss.ffii.org/GaussFrontPage)
13Jan Bergstra & Paul Klint: About “Trivial” software patents: the IsNot case
Time for Discussion
Further info: www.cwi.nl/~paulk/patents
Open source: Sense and Simplicity for the software engineer(suggested by a Philips researcher)
OSS =