Howdy all, The relentless efforts of patent monopolists to restrict software ideas are evident in this article. Mark Summerfield discusses gambling machines, and the legal question of what makes a software idea eligible for patent: The Australian Patent Office has recently issued two decisions resulting from applicants requesting to be heard following examination objections that their respective inventions did not constitute patent-eligible subject matter, i.e. a ‘manner of manufacture’ under the Australian patent law. Both decisions relate to electronic gaming machines (commonly known as ‘poker machines’ or ‘slot machines’), and both involve the question of whether particular computer-implemented features of such machines are patentable. They differ, however, in the outcome. URL:http://blog.patentology.com.au/2016/07/australian-patent-office-clarifie... Rather wonkish; it assumes familiarity with, and acceptance of, the terminology of patentable software ideas. The issue is important though; courts seem to be dunned quite frequently with applicants insisting their idea is special and no-one gets to share it, and lawyers spend their time on esoterica at the fringes instead of challenging the notion altogether. How is the movement to end software idea patents going? -- \ “Only the shallow know themselves.” —Oscar Wilde, _Phrases and | `\ Philosophies for the Use of the Young_, 1894 | _o__) | Ben Finney