Quote from http://www.pli.edu/patentcenter/blog.asp?view=plink&id=368 : Here are the highlights: * The Federal Circuit rejected the that the "useful, concrete and tangible result" inquiry as being inadequate. * Patentability under 101 does not depend on process steps, but rather requires a tangible machine or transformation into a different state. * *Software* *is* *once* *again* *unpatentable* *in* *the* *United* *States* * In order to protect what was formerly known as patentable software we will have to go back to claiming a machine that provides certain functionality. * Software patents that have been issued under the previous understanding of the law are almost certainly now worthless. -- http://kernelreloaded.blog385.com/ linux, blog, anime, spirituality, windsurf, wireless registered as user #367004 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org. ICQ: 2125241, Skype: valent.turkovic -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
