Re: The GPL and Patents: ROFL

[Hyman Rosen]

On 8/18/2010 4:33 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> Suppose a patentable idea along the lines of:
>      step 1: a
>      step 2: proclaim Terekhov an idiot
>      step 3: c
> and a program
> int main() {
>      step_1: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA();
>      step_2: ____________proclaim_Terekhov_an_idiot____________();
>      step_3: ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ();
> }
> which is not copyrightable at all (as a computer program work), yet
> a computer program work implementing proclaim_Terekhov_an_idiot() could be
> copyrightable!
>
> Got it now?

No, you are wrong. The computer program that you posit above
is probably copyrightable. It would only not be copyrightable
if you could demonstrate that this is the only natural way that
anyone would write such a program. Certainly a real patent with
a much longer series of claims than the toy claim above is
subject to much variability in its implementation, and therefore
a particular implementation will be copyrightable.

You are welcome to cite references to a case where a program was
denied copyright because it implemented a patent. Go ahead. I'll wait.