On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 18:47:38 -0500, John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hubert Chan writes: > > Ideas cannot be copyrighted. In order to protect an idea, you need > > to patent it... > > You are not supposed to be able to patent an idea either. > Unfortunately the distinction between an idea and an invention escapes > the USPTO (and most judges as well). ..in civilized countries however, ideas can be patented if, and _only_ if: 1. they indeed are new, _and_ 2. provide a reproducible technical effect _and_ 3. this reproducible technical effect is a product of _either_ 4a. a new method (such as an hand grenade for fishing) _or_ 4b. a new tool (such a laser gun for fishing), _and_ if 5. the anyone reasonably knowledgeable with prior art in the relevant technical field, can reproduce the technical effect by combining prior art with the patented idea _for_ 6. commercial or governmental use. ..fair use is allowed, as is innovation in the field, a new competing idea to (re)produce the same technical effect, must be _different_ in either methodics _or_ introduce a new tool. ..whether or not patentable ideas are viable commercially, is consequently _irrelevant_ in all civilized jurisdictions, as commerciability is not a technological effect on anything ..this means that "software patents" can only cover methods or tools if they are part of the means to reproduce the technical effect, because and _only_ because said method or tool needs _that_ software, and is null and void as soon as anyone writes _another_ piece of software to replace "_that_" software. ..ditto for "biz patents" covering business methodics, the ideas in these can be used legally by copycat competitors to beat the original out of business. And the copycats are usually denied access to the original, say, franchise chains resources, such as logos, again legally. ..furthermore, anyone may use, say, IBM logo, to, say, organize a boycott on IBM, or Tux to lobby a ban on Linux, as long as it is clear that the boycott lobbyists does not use said logos to represent themselves as IBM or pro-Linux, if they use said logos to represent themselves as anti-IBM or anti-Linux, or for spite or ridicule, this is all 'fair use' under the law; Microsoft may _legally_ use Tux to ask the American Public "You saw the Twin Towers fall; Who has cost America the most, Microsoft, al-Quaeda or this stupid bird?". ;-) ..however, _expressions_ of ideas, such as a book, or a logo, or software, are covered by copyright law, and can only be covered by copyright law. "2+2" is just _one_ way to express "4", and it is an _old_ way. .._expressions_ of ideas, such as books, or logos, or software covered by copyright law, are usually also covered by contract law, because most people don't write everything damned they need, they buy stuff, and usually under contracts. Contract law allows the Microsoft EULA to limit their buyers, their rights under copyright law to use what they paid for, and under the GPL, it is used to expand some rights under copyright law and to limit other rights, under both copyright law and contract law; "You may sell my software under the GPL, if and only if, you give me your source so I can sell your software under the GPL.". -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
