On 10/23/06, Markus Laire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/23/06, Smylers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Markus Laire writes: > > > Does anyone know if programming languages are protected by copyright > > or not? > > Code can be copyrighted; ideas can't be. Yes, but the syntax of the programming language is more than just an idea. Copyright-article[1] at Wikipedia says that "Copyright is a set of exclusive rights regulating the use of a particular expression of an idea or information." So, for example, the idea of look-behind assertions can't be copyrighted as it's an idea. But what about a particular form chosen to express that idea (e.g. to use <before pattern> to denote look-behind)? Can this be copyrighted as it's more than just an idea?
Here's another example (which I can work through to completion, unlike the look-behind example: It is an idea (and an old one) to place a symbol between two parts of a mathematical expression to indicate the two parts should be added together. That idea is uncopyrightable. Going further, it is also an idea that should multiple parts be present separated by the addition symbol without anything to group them into pairs, they should be added from left to right. It is an idea that that symbol should be "+", and is likewise uncopyrightable. It is an idea that, when parsing such an expression, the rule to handle the first idea should be that an expression can be a term, or a combination of an expression, a '+' symbol, and a term. This is also uncopyrightable. The parsing rule (in BNF): expression :== term | expression '+' term; is a particular expression of the idea we've been talking about, and as such, is theoretically copyrightable. However, it is also about the only way to express that particular idea in BNF, so it may fail copyrightability (in the US) on those lines anyway. I wouldn't worry about stealing syntax from other languages, as long as you don't steal their source code without permission. Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, IP or otherwise, and the above should not be construed as legal advice. Look-behind assertions are an idea. The use of <before pattern> as syntax to denote look-behind assertions is also an idea. The abstract grammar that [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright
ps. I'm asking this because I'm thinking of creating a (simple) programming language by myself, but I'm unsure about how much syntax I could copy from any existing programming languages. -- Markus Laire
