Chessbase patent
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 550
- Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 8:48 pm
- Full name: Alayan Feh
Re: Chessbase patent
If you tried to patent a move, you deserved every criticism you got. The issue isn't the move's quality but the move patenting attempt itself.
-
- Posts: 4889
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:34 am
- Location: Pen Argyl, Pennsylvania
Re: Chessbase patent
That one is quite old and expired, it looks like the new one was meant to replace the old in some respects with some enhancements. Software patents are very tricky, and quite often litigious.Andrew wrote: ↑Tue Nov 17, 2020 10:17 amTHey were also the same inventors for the
https://patents.google.com/patent/US567 ... c678%2c001
patent i.e. the Chess Mentor program
So I don't think a patent troll.(They have products)
In 2014, the United States Supreme Court opined on the patent eligibility of computer-implemented inventions. In the landmark case, Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, the Court held that all claims of a patent owned by Alice Corp., including method, system, and computer-readable medium claims, are drawn to an abstract idea and, therefore, are not patent-eligible. The Court stated that the claims of an abstract idea of intermediated settlement and that implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer failed to transform the abstract idea into patent-eligible subject matter. Anybody can submit a patent and perhaps obtain a patent — but whether that patent will hold in court is an entirely different matter. This ruling certainly boded well for many of the Apple software patents as they will never have the "generic computer" patent defect in those software patents designed and deployed on Apple built computers and iPhones.
-
- Posts: 626
- Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 10:07 pm
- Location: the Netherlands
- Full name: Jef Kaan
Re: Chessbase patent
Alayan,
i didn't patent a move, a registered an opening
system with 1.e3 (and opening book) as intellectual
property, but it's decades ago, and i wasn't into this
chess world as i'm now...
For the rest my message was in ironic style,
and i'm ofcourse not going to claim 'ownership'
of such an idea to the writer of this 1.e3 poison book !
(in which he anyway doesn't use 1.e3 as first move).
NB 1.e3 is known as the Van 't Kruis opening, and
often is transposing to 1.d4 systems. But we know
nowadays it's not as strong as 1.e4 !
best regards
Nowadays
i didn't patent a move, a registered an opening
system with 1.e3 (and opening book) as intellectual
property, but it's decades ago, and i wasn't into this
chess world as i'm now...
For the rest my message was in ironic style,
and i'm ofcourse not going to claim 'ownership'
of such an idea to the writer of this 1.e3 poison book !
(in which he anyway doesn't use 1.e3 as first move).
NB 1.e3 is known as the Van 't Kruis opening, and
often is transposing to 1.d4 systems. But we know
nowadays it's not as strong as 1.e4 !
best regards
Nowadays