[A2k] Re: [Patents] Re: [Upd-discuss] SCOTUS Overrules Rigid US AppealsCourt Approach to Patentability of Combinations of Existing Elements

[Gregory Aharonian]

Seth Johnson writes:
>The MS v ATT finding recognizes that code is the representation of
>pure abstraction.

There are many incorrect statements about source code and object code
in the Microsoft/ATT decision.  So it is clear that the Justices don't
understand the fundamentals of computer science.  Applying good legal
thinking to false science results in a decision impossible to practically
apply.

It is similar to the Benson decision, which was so bad that the Supremes
had to repudiate the decision with Diehr, and then let the Court of Appeals
of the Federal Circuit clean up the mess over the next few decades.

Microsoft/ATT repeats this.  Within a few years, the Supremes will have
issue a decision that counters Microsoft/ATT, and the Federal Circuit will
then have to clean up the mess.  There is no justice in a decision about
science that is based on false science.

If you want to win this debate of science and engineering, don't rely on
judges who don't understand the science and engineering.  Eventually the
law catches up with the mistakes.  This statement about magentic tape
fields on a hard drive is a horrible mistake.

Greg Aharonian