Re: file location

From	William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.misc
Subject	Re: file location
Date	2015-02-04 23:19 +0000
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<mau9da$obm$2@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(9 earlier) <maqun2$6cc$2@dont-email.me> <87zj8uewmc.fsf@thumper.dhh.gt.org> <mar3j2$96i$3@news.albasani.net> <marrkv$vuo$2@dont-email.me> <mass0c$f5l$1@news.albasani.net>

Show all headers | View raw

On 2015-02-04, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 04/02/15 01:11, William Unruh wrote:
>> On 2015-02-03, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 03/02/15 17:24, John Hasler wrote:
>>>> William Unruh writes:
>>>>> A translation of book A IS a copy of it.
>>>>
>>>> Strictly speaking it is a derivative work (still controlled by
>>>> copyright, though).
>>>>
>>>> It is not at all clear how the case would have turned out had it gone to
>>>> trial, though.  Ideas are not protected by copyright and it could be
>>>> argued that by the time they went from VAX assembler to C and made
>>>> changes to meet Microsoft's requirements that no "creative expression"
>>>> remained.
>>>>
>>>> Misappropriation of trade secrets would have been a separate issue, of
>>>> course.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Its not trade secrets - not OS code that can be disassembled. It is
>>> copyrightable intellectual property.
>>>
>>> A bubble sort algorithm doesn't change intellectual property just
>>> because its written in BASIC instead of FORTRAN.
>>
>> Well, it does actually. As Hassler said, it is a derivative work. But it
>> is still covered by copyright. It is a work whose expression depends on
>> the expression in the original Now had they done the Phoenix thing, and
>> set up two teams, one to abstract what the code did, the other to encode
>> that functionality without having seen the orginal, then it is NOT the
>> same, and is perfectly legal under copyright law. Independent creation
>> of the expression of an idea is perfectly OK. Thus My bubble sort
>> algorithm and yours both written in Basic can be independent creations,
>> if I never saw yours but read somewhere how a bubble sort works.
>>
>>

IF it is patented then yes, bubble sort is not patented, and since that
was your example, it is not clear why you are now brigin up patents.
Note that many companies do not want to patent, because you MUST reveal
all of the details of your system in order to patent it, allowing others
go discover how to the do the same thing but evading your patent. 

>
> I am afraid that if the algo is patented AS an algo, whether or not you 
> know of it or not when you re code it is a breach of whatever governs 
> patent law.
>
> So many features of engineering design are implementation independent, 
> but still patented.

See above. Most algorithms are not patented, some are-- not least
because they are obvious or there is prior art.

Thread

file location "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-01-30 18:00 -0500
  Re: file location William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-01-31 00:08 +0000
  Re: file location Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2015-01-31 00:30 +0000
    Re: file location William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-01-31 00:51 +0000
      Re: file location Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-01-31 09:03 +0000
        Re: file location William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-01-31 18:14 +0000
          Re: file location "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-01-31 19:00 -0500
            Re: file location William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-02-01 05:14 +0000
  Re: file location Zaphod Beeblebrox <none@none.org> - 2015-01-30 20:06 -0600
    Re: file location "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-01-31 18:54 -0500
      Re: file location Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2015-02-01 04:52 +0100
        Re: file location "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-02-02 15:50 -0500
          Re: file location Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2015-02-02 22:05 +0100
          Re: file location Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2015-02-02 22:29 +0000
            Re: file location "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-02-02 18:05 -0500
        Re: file location Chick Tower <c.tower@deadspam.com> - 2015-02-03 01:38 +0000
          Re: file location Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2015-02-03 02:54 +0100
            Re: file location Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-02-03 09:04 +0000
              Re: file location Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2015-02-03 11:27 +0100
                Re: file location Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-02-03 10:56 +0000
                Re: file location Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2015-02-03 12:10 +0100
                Re: file location Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-02-03 18:39 +0000
                Re: file location Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2015-02-04 01:51 +0100
                Re: file location Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-02-04 09:19 +0000
              Re: file location The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-02-03 12:21 +0000
                Re: file location Richard Kettlewell <rjk@greenend.org.uk> - 2015-02-03 12:57 +0000
                Re: file location William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-02-03 16:58 +0000
                Re: file location John Hasler <jhasler@newsguy.com> - 2015-02-03 11:24 -0600
                Re: file location The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-02-03 18:21 +0000
                Re: file location William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-02-04 01:11 +0000
                Re: file location The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-02-04 10:24 +0000
                Re: file location William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-02-04 23:19 +0000
                Re: file location Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2015-02-05 00:34 +0100
                Re: file location William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2015-02-04 01:08 +0000
                Re: file location The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2015-02-03 17:20 +0000
            Re: file location "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-02-03 14:47 -0500
              Re: file location Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2015-02-04 02:10 +0100

csiph-web