[Patents] Counterexamples to John, Hartmut, Edward

[dewaz dewaz@ran.es]

Gregory Aharonian wrote:

> Edward Avis writes:
> 
> >So I could protect my program, which is an implementation in C of a
> >particular sorting algorithm.  But I couldn't stop others from making
> >their own inventions based on the same algorithm.  This is exactly what
> >copyright on computer programs achieves.
> 
> And that is why people are increasingly abandoning copyright protection
> for software - because it gives no protection, and turning to patent
> protection.  If I invent a new sorting algorithm, and can't control how
> others exploit it with copyright protection,

Hi!
It would be really worthy you lose some time telling what do you
understand for 
"algorithm" and "control".
Do not be shy! he he ,sooner or later someone will have to define those
in a law.
Just do it!  -used without Nike tm license   X^D

Antonio Abrantes wrote that even patenting software you still can not
keep people out of implementing the theory of your soft patent wich
still is free.
I presume you do not agree with that ,Am I right?

> I will either get a patent
> or not disclose my sorting algorithm (except for those many programmers
> who voluntarily disclose new algorithms for everyone to use, which is
> nice but their choice). 

Hummm yes it is nice,cool,kind,good,satisfactory but the most important:
It helps to push scientific development 
You won't believe but Internet,later military uses and before Napster
and porn pics were the most useful tool to get that, cheaper and faster
than before.
How would you like patenting soft? without disclosement?
I am afraid you like a "tailored" patent system for soft:
No description of algorithm and not freedom for using the theory of the
invention.
Wrong?
Do not worry I won't try to ask you what is "theory"(discovery) and what
"implementetion"(invention) in a soft patent.

> Increasingly copyright is becoming absolutely
> useless to protect software - it is not an alternative to patent
> protection. 

The previous question again wrote differently(sorry)
Why do you think soft copyrighted is "useless" and "not an alternative"
to patenting?
What soft patents allows you to do and soft copyrights don't permit?




Oh no, monday morning is coming!


-- 
Futuro Agonico S.A es propietaria de la patente 4129583 que protege el 
proceso de respuesta de correos electronicos.
Evite acciones judiciales subscribiendo nuestro preceptivo canon.
http://www.ran.es/personal/dewaz/paynow.htm