flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > Copyleft

Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
asmhack



Joined: 01 Feb 2008
Posts: 431
asmhack
Post 04 May 2012, 21:34
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4238
Location: 2018
edfed
how can we protect an idea, and not the application of this idea?

is it a nonsense?

it is more dumb than pattenting about hardware stuff.
in this kind of domain, the idea is pattented, the hardware that exploit the idea is pattented, the process to craft this hardware is pattented, and even the name of the company that does it, and the name of the product is pattented. then, is it possible that software developpers are considered as dumbass by this kind of justice? where monsanto can pattent a genetic code, where dassault can pattent all aspects of his motors, etc... and now, where no software company can pattent a code, but just the idea, where the code itself is the idea, it would be difficult for new comers to emerge from the sea. cause the software cannot be pattented, any lobby will be able to pick it, and reverse it, and pattent it in a country where he can pattent it. and then, exploit it in this country, leaving the "no pattent" country far away.

new middle age is coming for us. Laughing
Post 05 May 2012, 12:46
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
revolution
When all else fails, read the source


Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17287
Location: In your JS exploiting you and your system
revolution
No country currently allows patenting (or copyright) of ideas. No one ever has, and hopefully no one ever will.

Perhaps some people confuse the expression of an idea with the idea itself.
Post 05 May 2012, 12:54
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4238
Location: 2018
edfed
it is easy to confuse ideas and expression of the ideas. meaning, in another word, that even if the wiktionary have a clear definition for them, the law will have another, the lawer too, the company that will sue somebody too will have a different interpretation of the frontier behind ideas and application of it.

in software, the idea and the software itself is really linked.

basically, in software, nothing should be holded by copyright, even the idea, cause an idea is just the expression of a will from instinctive reflexion. anybody on the planet is able to have ideas assuming he is confronted to the problem.

for a same situation, many humans will have the same idea.

what i've read in the article is little blur. maybe the digest is too small to give a better idea (copyrighted) of what they mean by impossible to hold a copyright on an application.
Quote:
So in other words you can only protect the ideas and principles of your code but not the actual program itself.

imagine, if the idea is to have an application that takes the temperature, and predict the weater for 4 days, can somebody copyright it? apparently yes.
and then, the guy who really coded that (he had the idea too, of course), gave big effort to write this elementary idea, will not have the right to hold copyright on real job? hem... no, and he will have to give royalties to the guy who did nothing else than having the idea. this new laws seems to have taken the fish by the wrong side.

of course, copyright is bad, but why allowing it somewhere, and forbid it elsewhere?
Post 05 May 2012, 13:40
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
I vaguely assume this is related to Oracle vs. Google somehow (re: copyrighting Java).
Post 05 May 2012, 13:55
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
edfed



Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 4238
Location: 2018
edfed
related to G vs O, because of G vs O, but for everybody now. maybe also because A vs S, M vs L, etc...
Post 05 May 2012, 17:30
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
bzdashek



Joined: 15 Feb 2012
Posts: 147
Location: Tolstokvashino, Russia
bzdashek
What Oracle makes besides it's database is awful crap.


Last edited by bzdashek on 05 May 2012, 17:30; edited 1 time in total
Post 05 May 2012, 17:30
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
pelaillo
Missing in inaction


Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 878
Location: Colombia
pelaillo
The article got it wrong. The ruling in Europe is that you cannot copyright a computer language, structure or APIs because it amounts to copyrighting of ideas.
A particular implementation in the form of a source code can be protected by copyright.
Post 06 May 2012, 02:28
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger Reply with quote
aq83326



Joined: 25 Jun 2011
Posts: 21
aq83326
I don't think WPL did anything wrong, and I like that the functionality of a program can't be copyrighted, though I disagree with some findings.

While I find software patents detestable and the GPL loathesome, try to bear with me.
if I write
Code:
AwesomeStruct AwesomeProc(AwesomeStruct AwesomeParam);    

and then someone else writes
Code:
AwesomeStruct AwesomeProc(AwesomeStruct AwesomeParam);    

They...look...similar, almost as if they have been...I don't know, copied?

Although I think the above probably has more to do with the Oracle vs Google case; in short, I think api's probably should be copyrightable-though of course not languages themselves, that's just silly. In the EU case, WPL seems to have simply done a bit of black box reverse engineering.


Last edited by aq83326 on 09 May 2012, 03:22; edited 4 times in total
Post 09 May 2012, 03:09
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
aq83326



Joined: 25 Jun 2011
Posts: 21
aq83326
Suppose I wrote a book with many chapters and chapter 5 was the following
Quote:
Chapter 5, The best chapter....*insert chapter here*
and then someone else wrote the same words for chapter 5 but made the rest of their book different, that's still copyright infringement.

This is why I think api's might be copyrightable.
Post 09 May 2012, 03:12
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  


< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on YouTube, Twitter.

Website powered by rwasa.