|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 20 2012 @ 12:46 AM EDT |
what if i can arrive at same solution with differant
language and thus my machine say coded at a lower level to
the machines binary kernal is this more efficient , does
that mean i derived off that other coders works or patents
of his machine when i clearly did something in another
language.
ITS like some upper class guy giving a 40 minute speech with
long eloquent words and structure and me saying in 1 sentence:
YA the party is at 5pm....
we both have our WAYS to arrive at a solution but the end
result is the same....this is really about controlling
efficiency and productivity and innovation.
ID rather just hear the part is at 5 pm then have to be
forced to hear a 40 minute speech to get that solution.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: ftcsm on Friday, July 20 2012 @ 12:07 PM EDT |
The problem is that software if know to be purely expression
of ideas and then unpatentable.
So the new "theory" is that it should be allowed cause that a
bundle of "machine + software" is something new. So that's the
purpose of the article, show it's not that.
Want protection for software? Copyright.
Flavio
---
------
Faith moves mountains but I still prefer dynamite[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, July 20 2012 @ 06:24 PM EDT |
Because that's just blueprint publication, which patent law guarantees as a
RIGHT.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|