Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 15:16:15 -0500 From: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net> To: Bryan Maynard <bryan.maynard@reallm.com> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Software patents and FreeBSD Message-ID: <20050710201615.GB67772@over-yonder.net> In-Reply-To: <200507101430.10195.bryan.maynard@reallm.com> References: <9A4DB033-3EF6-498F-8DF7-FD402C8E5D9C@tamu.edu> <200507091303.13823.bryan.maynard@reallm.com> <2BDDEF4D-C4F2-465F-B8C5-9841383466FB@HiWAAY.net> <200507101430.10195.bryan.maynard@reallm.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jul 10, 2005 at 02:30:09PM +0000 I heard the voice of Bryan Maynard, and lo! it spake thus: > > softwere is not, in itself, an invention. Software uses language > constructs (if. . .then, foreach, for, do. . .while) to produce > funstionality. Elevators are not, in themselves, an invention; they just use physical constructs (counterweighting, pulleys, etc) to produce functionality. ASICs are not, in themselves, inventions; they just use logical constructs (gates, electrical flows) to produce functionality. Clothes washers are not, in themselves, an invention; they just use constructs (water, heat, detergant, agitation) to produce functionality. To argue otherwise would be patently absurd ;) Your arguments would be perfectly consistent if you were arguing against patents altogether, but they don't get you anywhere in attempting to demonstrate that a means to an end is somehow "different" if it involves typing instead of machining. -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | fullermd@over-yonder.net Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050710201615.GB67772>