Re:Judge Says Mathematical Algorithms Can’t Be Patented
by lisper on Thursday March 28, 2013 @02:43PM
(#5456821)
Does anyone know which patent is being asserted here? I thought Uniloc only had one patent, and it was related to try-and-buy DRM. But the description in the article says "processing of floating point numbers by the Linux operating system was a patent violation" which doesn't seem to fit. Is there another Uniloc patent?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Judge Says Mathematical Algorithms Can’t Be Patented
by dangrossman on Thursday March 28, 2013 @02:46PM
(#5456845)
This is the patent at issue:
> Method and apparatus for handling overflow and underflow in processing floating-point numbers
Re:Judge Says Mathematical Algorithms Can’t Be Patented
by joksnet on Thursday March 28, 2013 @05:11PM
(#5457659)
Under "Related Art" says:
> In an effort to unify methods employed in computer systems for performing binary floating-point arithmetic, the IEEE in the early 1980's standardized computer floating-point numbers. > [...] > In reshaping the IEEE format, the present invention retains most of its benefits while offering the microprocessor designer and the real-time programmer a much cleaner and more efficient implementation.
For what I understand, is an extension of the IEEE standard.
Re:Judge Says Mathematical Algorithms Can’t Be Patented
by lisper on Thursday March 28, 2013 @03:05PM
(#5456971)
Thanks.
But this is still perplexing: Surely, Linux just uses IEEE754 floating point, which predates this patent by 15 years?
Re:Judge Says Mathematical Algorithms Can’t Be Patented
by pavanky on Thursday March 28, 2013 @05:35PM
(#5457814)
You would be surprised by the sheer number of idiotic patents out in the wild.
Re:Judge Says Mathematical Algorithms Can’t Be Patented
by sthu11182 on Thursday March 28, 2013 @05:57PM
(#5457940)
a good sample - http://patently-useless.tumblr.com/