Re: [d@DCC] RE: eWeek Supports W3C Software Patents Stand!

From: Seth Johnson <seth.johnson _-at-_ realmeasures.dyndns.org>
To: General Discussion <discuss (at) digital-copyright.ca>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 19:22:30 -0400
References: <459F05C5CBAB824BB3DD965CC92BBFEA013CE317@swan.spectrumsignal.com>

This is not a well-informed analysis on my part, as far as the existing
legal structure goes, but it seems to me that patents are for (after
promoting progress of useful arts and sciences, of course) incentivizing
manufacturing.  Not for special protection that's needed for ideas, that we
supposedly need for inventions as opposed to copyright, as
pro-software-patent folks say.  I say this knowing that copyright and patent
law are very different, and that I know nothing about the patent side of
things.

But it seems to me to be a fruitful point to look at: in what way do we
really need an incentive for "manufacturing" software?  After the prototype
is done, it's just copying, using machinery most people have already
acquired.

This is beyond the point that what you're getting a patent on is algorithms,
not the sort of thing that should be patented.

Seth



Chris Brand wrote:
> 
> >Copyright protection should be enough.
> 
> This is what always gets me when thinking about software patents.
> Is there anything else that can be both patented and copyrighted ?
> Seems to me that the intent is that there should be no overlap between
> "things that can be copyrighted" and "things that can be patented".
> 
> Chris
> 
> --
> For (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and
> links to other related sites please see http://www.digital-copyright.ca

-- 

DRM is Theft!  We are the Stakeholders!

New Yorkers for Fair Use
http://www.nyfairuse.org

[CC] Counter-copyright: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cc/cc.html

I reserve no rights restricting copying, modification or distribution of
this incidentally recorded communication.  Original authorship should be
attributed reasonably, but only so far as such an expectation might hold for
usual practice in ordinary social discourse to which one holds no claim of
exclusive rights.

--
For (un)subscription information, posting guidelines and
links to other related sites please see http://www.digital-copyright.ca