[no subject]

This invention takes a new approach to the problem: it uses only a binary
adder to get the decimal sum or difference of two numbers, but does it in a
single cycle of the binary adder, thus significantly improving the speed of
operation without suffering the cost of an additional decimal adder. In
accordance with the invention, the binary sum of two bcd operands is
corrected by suitable gating as it travels from the binary adder to another
part of the microprocessors, e.g., the accumulator, so that it becomes the
binary coded decimal sum or difference of the two operands by the time it
reaches that other part of the microprocessor.
********************************************************

Just a bit more information then you need, but all inventors on a patent
application are considered equal under the law, so Peddle and Orgill are the
same no matter what their order is on the patent.

Anyway, that is the story the way I heard it. It wasn't that Peddle Et Al
stole the 6800 so much as they realized changes in the 6800 silicon layout
design that would reduce cost, increase yields, more efficient 4 cycle vs 8
cycle instruction execution, etcetera.

You could argue that they came to some of those conclusions at Motorola
which would make those modifications Motorola's intellectual property.

As far as the rest of the story goes, it all has to be subordinate in some
degree to the granting of this patent. For instance the story goes the 6502
came out because of the 6500/6800 not being protected. Since the 6502/68xx
series came out for better protection and did incorporate patented features
there has to be more to the Nintendo story then they got the 6502 cheap
because it wasn't protected.

The patent department would<should?> have never allowed the design to be
patented if it was known at the time. If it was known, the patent would have
been challenged and disallowed. That is how things work, 17 years exclusive
rights in exchange for devulging new technology.