Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2013 15:05:51 -0500 From: Joshua Isom <jrisom@gmail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: use of the kernel and licensing Message-ID: <5159E89F.9020909@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20130401164144.GA56768@neutralgood.org> References: <CAJ%2Bvzi9RZN5F50fCDJBGJ23R2%2BrhAsC10WSt_PMeFhO=WU3UZA@mail.gmail.com> <20130331001209.GA69583@neutralgood.org> <51583C91.5060000@a1poweruser.com> <20130331163143.aabedff2.freebsd@edvax.de> <op.wute6pxgg7njmm@michael-think> <20130331170902.bbcd8179.freebsd@edvax.de> <51599907.3010802@a1poweruser.com> <20130401213253.36230873@X220.ovitrap.com> <20130401164144.GA56768@neutralgood.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 4/1/2013 11:41 AM, kpneal@pobox.com wrote: > Copyright covers expressions of ideas. It does not cover the ideas themselves. > You can't copyright a concept, you can't copyright filesystems, and I > believe in the past few years a high court in the EU ruled that you can't > copyright a programming language. None of the things mentioned above are > covered by copyright. > > Copyright would cover the implementations of these things. That's why it > was necessary to reimplement much of BSD. > Here's where it gets annoying, copyrights cover implementations, and patents can cover the ideas. A lot of patents use an "on a computer" line to get it called an invention instead of an math equation.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5159E89F.9020909>