Dear SIGCIS: I trust I might be permitted to publicise here the fact that the paper: "How Percy Ludgate’s 1909 paper (and IBM) helped thwart Konrad Zuse’s Computer Patent in 1960" by Brian Coghlan, Ralf Buelow and myself has been accepted for publication in the IEEE Annals of the History of Computing. It is due to appear in Volume 46, Issue 3, July-September 2024. Paper Abstract: "This investigation outlines how Percy Ludgate’s 1909 paper describing his design for a mechanical computer, his “Analytical Machine”, was used in 1960 by a German patent attorney to thwart Konrad Zuse’s computer patent, just in time, as the patent (first applied for on 16th June 1941), was about to be granted. This narrative is then followed by analyses of, and discovery of proof of, the role of IBM in preventing Zuse from getting what would have been the premier patent on the concept of a programmable computer, and then by an exploration of how information about Ludgate’s 1909 paper was found by (or for) the opposing German patent attorney." The accepted paper is available online at: https://www.scss.tcd.ie/SCSSTreasuresCatalog/ludgate/lnk131.html In addition, English translations of all the relevant Zuse patent litigation documents are provided onlne (side-by-side with transcriptions of the German originals from the ZIB.de Zuse Archive file as interleaved PDF documents), together with a large number of other supporting documents, at: https://www.scss.tcd.ie/SCSSTreasuresCatalog/ludgate/lnk610.html Quoting from our paper's Concluding Remarks: "The very fact that Ludgate’s 1909 paper on his Analytical Machine was employed to thwart Zuse’s attempt to patent the computer refutes the prevalent assumption that Ludgate had no influence on modern computing, and that his work is just of historical interest. Whatever the scale of their influence, patents can impact the commercial activities in the sector they apply to. Hence Ludgate’s paper clearly did have a potential influence on the commercial future of computers, even if his work was unknown to the developers of the early electronic computers. However, we have deliberately avoided speculating on the types or the extent of the possible commercial consequences, either to Zuse’s company, or to the rest of the computer industry, of the thwarting of Zuse’s attempts to obtain what would have been the first patent on a programmable computer." We would however be interested to receive informed comments on this issue, and also suggestions as to any further avenues we might pursue in attempting to identify exactly how information on Ludgate's work reached the opposing patent attorney. Cheers Brian Randell — School of Computing, Newcastle University, 1 Science Square, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE4 5TG EMAIL = Brian.Randell@ncl.ac.uk PHONE = +44 191 208 7923 URL = https://www.ncl.ac.uk/computing/staff/profile/brianrandell.html