I did not know you could patent data structures like that.

jonathaneunice 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

IP owners often play the game of “patent what you can, threaten with the rest.” So you might not be able to strictly patent the way data is laid out, but specific, novel algorithms that update or manipulate that layout and improve what was possible before? Those can be understood as key steps of an “innovative process”—and courts have been willing to uphold process claims, especially when tied to what they understand are genuine technical improvements. Fighting even a marginal patent usually means a long, expensive slog with plenty of downside risk.

IANAL nor a patent judge, but this is my understanding after watching the space for some years.

▲

thayne 4 days ago | parent [-]

At least this is how it works in the US. And in the US algorithms are (unfortunately) patentable. That is not the case in all countries.

	▲	jonathaneunice 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Correct. But at the same time, globalization means legal mandates are increasingly extra-territorial in scope and impact. U.S. patent law affects anyone whose products touch the American market. Similarly, CCPA/CPRA and GDPR reach far beyond their nominal geographic borders.

▲

wokkel 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You can in the US. Not so much in the rest of the world.

▲

psychoslave 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

That's juridiction dependent. Europe didn't allow such a thing last time I checked. But lobbying to do so as been recurrent on this topic, just like putting governmental backdoor everywhere. They will try until it passes. There should be legal penality for such a stubborn will to destroy civil liberty. At least in this case they can't play the card "think of the children, nazi pedophiles use this".