decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Software copyright | 354 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Software copyright
Authored by: dio gratia on Tuesday, November 27 2012 @ 04:05 PM EST
Personally I think the value of software 'IP' will have to shift. There's more
need for coders than there available bodies, even staving off demand with open
source and massive walled garden singalongs.

We right software essentially the same way we did 60 years ago (although not
constrained to 80 column line records). The solution to not enough bodies is
more automation even in homogenization through walled gardens and capture of
available programming talent.

Automation brings the promise of re-use meaning non-original expression
ineligible for copyright and domain specific languages ala Charles Simonyi's
Intentional Programming or something even better bringing more idea-expression
merger to software work with concurrent loss of copyright eligibility.

Sure we'll see a push to license everything, which can essentially ignore
failings in copyright eligibility. Copyleft licenses fight that and once the
ubiquitous demand for software catches up to the idea we've been facing
artificial scarcity we'll see tools that enable those not previously employed as
programmers to create needed software. Simonyi talks about roles, specifically
separating out architecture which can be constrained by standardization.
Adopting the language of open standards means idea-expression merger when the
very language is also your programming language (and lacks originality).

The effect is to not allow anything essential to be bottled up behind licensing,
while sanding off the harsh corners of artificial scarcity (expense). While it
will also bring new obviousness to the table as we have language that embraces
skill in the art, software patents are the real threat. Copyright despite it's
120 year commercial life is a passing fad as a marketing distinction.

You could take out automation and address foreign competition. I used to be a
chip designer and have worked in various disciplines where China, India and
Indonesia now dominate. Someone found a way to make scarcity economics work
for competition by applying cheap labor.

It also explains why there are so many people interested in maintaining software
patents, without which they'd have no marketing distinctiveness to prop up
prices and suppress competition.

Patents disable competition and innovation at every turn, you could spend an
afternoon going through patent applications out of Intentional Programming.

Now the question is do artificial market barriers promote the sciences and arts
in the face of global markets where the issue is number of practitioners of the
arts? Homogeneity precludes technical creativity other than by centralized
means, the priests declaring the inundation.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )