On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 9:47 AM, Daniel Berlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 9:14 AM, Robert Dewar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Diego Novillo wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 04:49, Steven Bosscher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I wonder if GCC's VRP ASSERT_EXPRs would be considered prior art. >>> >>> Even earlier than that. The assertion mechanism in GCC was taken >>> directly from the PLDI'95 Patterson paper. >> >> Does anyone know if inclusion of something in openly available source >> code has been accepted as proper publication for prior art? (it does >> not meet the letter, but it does meet the spirit I would say). > > The patent examiners i've spoken with in the past (and their > supervisors) consider publicly available source code to be prior art. > I am too lazy to search federal circuit case law, but my recollection > is that their is a case or two on point here saying it is. > (They read "printed publication" very broadly to include any document > available to the public) > Here you go:
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/2100_2128.htm
