The continuous measuring of the temperature inside the mold cavity (without having to open the mold) distinguishes the Diehr patent from what we call a software

The continuous measuring of the temperature inside the mold cavity (without having to open the mold) distinguishes the Diehr patent from what we call a software patent. Actually, even the "using a computer to do it" part is different. Most software patents are essentially an algorithm attached to a general-purpose computer. This relationship cannot be claimed to be novel. Diehr could at least claim that their device as a whole was novel and nonobvious (though the Supreme Court case didn't examine those questions).