Alexander Terekhov wrote:
[http://www.softwarefreedom.org/publications/msvatt.pdf]
Toward the end, arch legal GNU beagle Eben eloquently states:
"Thus, this Court's precedent repeatedly sets out that software, which
is nothing more than a set of instructions -- an algorithm -- to be
performed by a computer in order to solve some mathematical problem,
is ..."
According to the US Copyright Office, Copyright protection is not
available for ideas, program logic, algorithms, systems, methods,
concepts, ...
So... copyright protection is not available for software as defined by
arch legal GNU beagle Eben.
GPL? Who is GPL?
regards,
alexander.
--
"Join the boycott of Chinese products"
-- www.stallman.org
Word has it that Eben Moglen is fed up with the public's general
ignorance concerning copyright law and is about to incorporate the
following Supreme Court interpretation of copyright law as the Preamble
to his new patent-busting GPL3 copyright license:
“In addition to spurring the creation and publication of new expression,
copyright law contains built-in First Amendment accommodations. See id.,
at 560. First, it distinguishes between ideas and expression and makes
only the latter eligible for copyright protection. Specifically, 17 U.
S. C. §102(b) provides: “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.” As we said in Harper & Row, this
“idea/expression dichotomy strike[s] a definitional balance between the
First Amendment and the Copyright Act by permitting free communication
of facts while still protecting an author’s expression.” 471 U. S., at
556 (internal quotation marks omitted). DUE TO THIS DISTINCTION, EVERY
IDEA, THEORY, AND FACT IN A COPYRIGHTED WORK BECOMES INSTANTLY AVAILABLE
FOR PUBLIC EXPLOITATION AT THE MOMENT OF PUBLICATION. See Feist, 499 U.
S., at 349–350.
Second, the “fair use” defense allows the public to use NOT ONLY FACTS
AND IDEAS contained in a copyrighted work, but also expression itself in
certain circumstances. Codified at 17 U. S. C. §107, the defense
provides: . . .”, Eldred V. Ashcroft, 537 U.S. 186 (2003).
Looks like like the Microsoft-Novell deal is a cooked goose. . . (:
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
