|
|
|
| Authored by: Ian Al on Sunday, July 07 2013 @ 12:23 PM EDT |
You said:"...So you cannot copyright written or spoken expression
that communicates your beliefs..."
This is incorrect. You can
copyright the expression. The law says:
"...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..."
I gave the dictionary definition of the
word 'expression' to make my point:3: the communication (in speech
or writing) of your beliefs or opinions; "expressions of good will"; "he helped
me find verbal expression for my ideas"; "the idea was immediate but the
verbalism took hours"
In my view, beliefs or opinions fit into the
subject matter excluded from copyright because they both fit into the excluded
categories of ideas, concepts and principles. Expression communicating those
beliefs is not protected by copyright.
Perhaps I should have been more
precise and made it clear that expression in writing that communicates your
beliefs does not produce copyrightable subject matter. It is only when you
express anything at all as an original work of authorship that the authorship,
and not the expression of ideas, is protected by copyright.
This drives
home the point that it is not the idea of doing a range check and not the
writing down of the process for achieving the idea with a computer that can be
protected by copyright. Only the original work of authorship that is produced in
the expression of these ideas and procedures can be protected by copyright. It
is not the expression that is copyright, but the
authorship.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid! [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, July 08 2013 @ 10:53 AM EDT |
IANAL, the following is my opinion based on my conclusions of how the
different levels of Law apply patents.
If I understand what you're saying
then it is applied to Patents: at least from the position of the
Supremes.
Patent applies to a specific implementation (specific physical
manifestation) of an idea but not to the idea itself!
Of course... the
USPTO has to come in line with that idea and start rejecting any patents that
are broad enough to lay claim to the idea. And then the District and Federal
Circuits have to come into line and uphold that.
RAS[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
