| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Piano roll blues ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Piano roll blues
The Piano Roll Blues or Old Piano Roll Blues is a figure of speech designating a legal argument (or the response to that argument) made in US patent law relating to computer software. The argument is that a newly programmed general-purpose digital computer is a “new” machine and, accordingly, properly the subject of a US patent.〔The case most often cited for the argument is ''In re Bernhart'', 417 F.2d 1395, 1400 (CCPA 1969), but a slightly earlier formulation of the argument occurs in ''In re Prater'', 415 F.2d 1393, 1403 n.29 (CCPA 1969).〕
This legal argument was made in ''Gottschalk v. Benson'' in Benson’s brief. The government then responded in its brief that this amounted to asserting that inserting a new piano roll into an existing player piano converted the old player piano into a new player piano.〔For a discussion of the use of the Old Piano Roll Blues in ''Benson'' and subsequent cases, see, for example, (Chapter 8: Patent Protection of Software: Statutory Subject Matter in the Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit; A. The Supreme Court Trilogy on Statutory Subject Matter ), George Washington Law School. A discussion of the history and current
status of the piano roll blues is found in (Richard H. Stern, ''Alice v CLS Bank: US Business Method and Software Patents Marching towards Oblivion?'' ), () Eur. Intell. Prop. Rev. 619, 620.〕 After ''Benson'', the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals took the position that the reasoning of ''Benson'' did not apply to "machine" claims, such as a claim to a conventional digital computer programmed to carry out a new algorithm or computer program.〔''In re Johnston'', 502 F.2d 765 (CCPA 1974), reversed on obviousness grounds sub. nom. ''Dann v. Johnston'', 450 U.S. 175 (1976).〕 In dissenting from that judgment on the grounds that the Supreme Court in ''Benson'' did not limit the principle to method claims, Judge Rich spoke of "the legal doctrine that a new program makes an old general purpose digital computer into a new and different machine." ''Id''. at 773. He observed that the doctrine "partakes of the nature of a legal fiction when it comes to drafting claims." ''Id''.
The argument appeared again two decades later in the majority opinion in ''In re Alappat'',〔''In re Alappat'', 33 F.3d 1526, 1545 (Fed. Cir. 1994) ("We have held that , (Sung ) (by Al Jolson).〕 — in the style of a Scott Joplin rag. As Judge Archer points out in his ''Alappat'' dissent, there is also an allusion to the decision of the Supreme Court in ''White-Smith v. Apollo'', concerning copyright protection for piano rolls.
== References ==
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Piano roll blues」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|