Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2001 23:40:00 +0200 (CEST) From: Salvo Bartolotta <bartequi@neomedia.it> To: Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com> Cc: Salvo Bartolotta <bartequi@neomedia.it>, "P. U. (Uli) Kruppa" <root@pukruppa.de>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: Use of the UNIX Trademark Message-ID: <1002663600.3bc36eb096ee5@webmail.neomedia.it> In-Reply-To: <000601c15084$87edd360$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> References: <000601c15084$87edd360$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com> wrote: > There's currently a huge argument over software patents, ie: patentable > algorithims. <snip> I seem to undertstand that the law applying to software is different in Europe, ie copyright-oriented (Europe) rather than patent-oriented (USA). The patent question perplexes me, probably because I have a very limited understanding/knowledge of its issues and niceties. <exercise type="wild imagination"> For one moment, suppose that the principle of algorithm patentability came true to the fullest extent. [the choice of "come true" is NOT coincidental ;-)] The next day, I would wake up and patent the algorithm solving 2nd degree algebraic equations. I chose a trivial example just for the sake of simplicity. You could substitute algorithms/theorems on [differential or algebraic] equations; numerical analysis/calculus algorithms (eg Runge-Kutta methods); etc. etc. etc. By the way, the discussion is not purely theoretical: think eg of CRC polynomials... Next, I would write a program in BEEEE_sick solving 2nd degree algebraic equations. A month later, you would chance to write another such program, without any prior knowledge of my patent(s) or even my program(s). Finally, I would sue you for two patent infringements: the algorithm and the program. Rich lawsuits. :-)) Alternatively, you would have to pay [$$$]$$$ each and every time you made use of the aforementioned algorithm. Hmm, that would sound like quick and steady progress for the whole field of studies and/or applications. :-) </exercise> I may be missing something, er, quite a lot of things, but such scenarios make little to no sense (to me) -- however subtle/clever/precise/interesting/rigorous/etc may be, computationally speaking, the chosen definition of algorithm complexity and/or ahem "originality". Incidentally -- it's just my impression, mind you -- I would say this kind of law, in the long run, might be very harmful to software industry itself. Then again, I may be completely wrong about the whole matter. -- Salvo To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1002663600.3bc36eb096ee5>