[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The GPL and Patents: ROFL

From: RJack
Subject: Re: The GPL and Patents: ROFL
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 16:00:03 -0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100802 Thunderbird/3.1.2

On 8/19/2010 10:50 AM, Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 8/18/2010 5:46 PM, RJack wrote:
On 8/18/2010 3:06 PM, Hyman Rosen wrote:
Really, I have no idea what this absurd discussion is even about
anymore. The notion that copyright does not apply to a computer
program which implements a patented process is patently

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm, "... a computer program ..." ? Nobody said "a
computer program wasn't protected in the abstract -- only that
specific lines implementing the patent's claims are not eligible in
the context of the patent.

Yes, that's the absurd notion. It's just false. If you believe
otherwise, perhaps you can point to a court case where copyright was
disallowed on a work or parts of it because it implemented a patent

No court case is required:
"17 USC ยง 102. Subject matter of copyright: In general.
(b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of
authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of
operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in
which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work."

Which part of  "... regardless of the form in which it is described,
explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work" don't you understand?
If you can't understand the plain teaching of the statute as written
then all the court cases in the world won't help.

It's just like President Obama and the birthers. No amout of rational
argument will convince them. Like a little kid who asks an unbroken
litany of 'why'. At some point you just have to give up and stop
responding to the bait.

RJack :)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]