Re: Are Microsoft¹s patent lawyers really this dumb?

[Barry Margolin]

In article <85lkdrxi7h.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> 
wrote:

> Kurt Häusler <usenet@haeusler.NO.co.SPAM.nz> writes:
> 
> > On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 22:36:20 +1200, Jonathan Walker wrote:
> >
> >
> >> If *you* own the copyrights, then *you* can choose what license you want
> >> to release the software under.
> >> 
> >> If your company owns the copyrights, then your company can choose what
> >> license it wants to release the software under.
> >> 
> >> Copyright ownership is the important thing - not patents.
> >
> > Well that's an issue in itself, I am now unsure who owns it.
> 
> The author, unless he has a contractual default transferring ownership
> of his works in company time to the employer.

Or if it's a "work for hire", i.e. writing the software is part of your 
job, in which case the employer is normally the owner.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***