[%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%|loc%074db819ec)Reply to sender(074db819ec%END%074db819ec) (074db819ec%|loc%074db819ec)to list(074db819ec%END%074db819ec)

(074db819ec% IF user.email == 'ehj@cleosan.com' || is_owner %074db819ec) (074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
(074db819ec% END %074db819ec)
PILCH Hartmut wrote:

I therefore propose to forget about terms such as "idea vs expression"
and instead treat copyright and patent as two proposed solutions to the
problem of turning software achievements into assets (software IP), and
compare the parameters that matter in this context, such as exclusion
scope, cost and speed.

Swedish immaterialrätt (~=IP) is already set up that way, that is should identify the achievement and attach appropriate exclusion rights to it according to the overall goal of promoting achievements.

//Erik


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

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