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

Gear

Groklaw Gear

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


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


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
The difference | 118 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
The difference
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, July 07 2013 @ 06:46 PM EDT
Yes but not all artificial languages are programming languages. We have at least
Esperanto, Ido, Occidental, and Volapyk that is meant to be for general language
use.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

From a copyright perspective: it dun matter
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 08 2013 @ 10:46 AM EDT

Copyright protects the "expression in a fixed form" of an idea. Not the idea itself. It also has limitations such as that it doesn't cover facts.

Whether the language is natural* or not is not affected by what is protectable by Copyright.

* One could reasonably state that the English language is not natural either. Much like each succeeding generation of computer language, English was a means of communication that evolved into it's current state over time. Just like the "raw computer language" concept of electric current on/off evolved over time to become more English like.

English being a less concise language then any computer language primarily because humans are adaptable and forgiving in their understanding whereas computers are strict and unforgiving (so far).

RAS

[ 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 )