Re: [Patents] Copyright on ideas, procedures, methods of operation ormathematical concepts

["Christian Beauprez" <beauprez@beauprez.fsnet.co.uk>]

Dear Seth,


>Well, this derives from the fact that even a sequence of rephrased
>expressions of the ideas expressed by somebody else, is a selection and
>arrangement -- that particular sequence of ideas, in that order, would
>constitute originality and therefore a duplication of original expression,
>even if the ideas are expressed in other words.  The structure, the
>selection and arrangement is the same, and if that structure is original,
>this duplication would be infringement (this is essentially the same
concept
>that applies for translations).  This analysis of originality doesn't
depend
>on substantiality, but sequencing, selection and arrangement.

I totally agree, but perhaps I'm  not putting it as I should. You are of
course correct, when I said substancial I was refering to the sequenced
expression or structure (including when these are ideas and not literal
words) . Sorry to be a little unclear.

Thanks for your examples on this- I shall look further into it. You have
certainly given me a good idea as to the debates going on in copyright at
the moment, and the differing philosophies behind this concept.

 Indeed copyright may require reform, again due to selective interpretation
rather than the principals on which it was established. I am sure that your
work in this area will help this reform. I suppose what I was trying to say
in essence is that it is far better to attempt to reform copyright as
authors than further distort this protection by allowing people to claim
concepts in themselves as inventions, which I know we can both agree on.


Kindest Regards,

Chris