|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, September 02 2012 @ 11:02 AM EDT |
Thanks, that was quite informative.
I was aware of the derivative works and parodies, which for the most part do not
have analogies in the software world.
However, as you mention, there does seem to be protection for the plot/outline
(story) of the book in addition to the words themselves. In other words, a
limited protection over the 'idea' of the book. This clearly is a matter of
degree...nobody can sue over a book about wizards, but if you stray too close to
the ideas/storyline behind Harry Potter you can be sued.
My understanding is that software copyright does not provide a similar
protection of 'idea' or 'concept' but only protection for the literal code. This
seems to be a flaw (in my mind at least) of thinking that copyright alone is
sufficient protection for software intellectual property.
Perhaps software patents aren't the correct solution to this problem, but I
think you have to make a choice:
1. Decide that the ideas behinds software ARE worthy of protection, in which
case there needs to be a mechanism analogous to literary 'copyright' in which
the detailed concept of a book is protected (but not the generic concept).
2. Decide that the ideas behinds software ARE NOT worthy of protection. At this
point, it would seem that advocates of FOSS should be trying to get rid of both
software patents AND copyright and have software be public domain. Otherwise,
you are just setting up a situation in which big companies with lots of
resources can copy ideas by rewriting code (which can take a lot of effort in
complex cases) but little companies without resources can't copy the same ideas.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
