Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 11:45:42 +0200 From: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) To: Dennis Olvany <dennisolvany@gmail.com> Cc: David Hoffman <zionicman@gmail.com>, freebsd-user-groups@freebsd.org, thisdayislong <thisdayislong@gmail.com>, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, ingrid@cityscope.net, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Fwd: Serious breach of copyright -- First post Message-ID: <86d5d4upmh.fsf@xps.des.no> In-Reply-To: <4497737D.5020902@gmail.com> (Dennis Olvany's message of "Mon, 19 Jun 2006 23:03:09 -0500") References: <e8b564e30606181649x7fa8f319x74138b673364f73f@mail.gmail.com> <f5b151550606181732x7562ce6fg1bb4f3baa5124716@mail.gmail.com> <e8b564e30606181738q4ac258c4ye96186ec2c30cb43@mail.gmail.com> <e8b564e30606181741u1a2e966fw513d49fadc369935@mail.gmail.com> <4495F9A1.8040407@gmail.com> <867j3dwjq3.fsf@xps.des.no> <449691D9.4020704@gmail.com> <86odwputto.fsf@xps.des.no> <4497737D.5020902@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dennis Olvany <dennisolvany@gmail.com> writes: > Johnathan Michaels hit on the next point I would like to make and > that is the distinction between patent and copyright. A method or > process may be patented, but the factual written procedure of such > may not be copyrighted. I'll follow up with some examples of the > types are things that are not copyrightable in a final attempt to > convey my point. You are wrong. The method or process is patentable. A written description of the method or process is copyrightable. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86d5d4upmh.fsf>