[%TAGS (074db819ec% %074db819ec) %]

(074db819ec% subtitle %074db819ec)

(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)chronological(074db819ec% END %074db819ec) (074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Thread(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)

(074db819ec% IF user.email && action == 'arc' %074db819ec) (074db819ec% END %074db819ec)

From: Hartmut Pilch <phm@a2e.de>
To: Ward Vandewege <ward@pong.be>
Cc: patents@aful.org
Subject: Re: [Patents] copyright scope
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2003 14:30:07 +0200 (CEST)

> On Sun, Apr 27, 2003 at 01:04:12AM +0100, iriXx wrote:
> > the other difficulty with patents is you can't do anything like the GPL
> > - which takes the existing principles of copyright and works within them
> > to create freedom. there is no way that patent law can be made to do
> > this sort of thing... not that i can see...
>
> Well, there is 'defensive publishing'. The idea is to publish inventions in
> detail, so that they will constitute prior art and hence will not be
> patentable.

That's not a correct analogy.
Copyright gives you possiblities to "create freedom" (see above) that
wouldn't exist without copyright.

"Defensive publishing" is just a strategy for avoiding part of the harm
that is created by patents and wouldn't exist without them.

Re: [Patents] The politics of software over-protection -- moving forward.., (continued)

(074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)Archive powered by(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) MhonArc 2.6.16.

(074db819ec%TAGS [% %]%074db819ec)