3 ms·

The original question seemed to pertain more to copyright than to patents - the patentability of software is very much debatable, but the copyrightability of th

• celoyd 16y ago
  I’m not an IP scholar, but my impression is that patents and copyright have basically the same intent; the only big difference is that patents are for methods and copyrights are for expressions. Where you draw the line between methods and expressions, or discovered and invented things, depends on how much you like Plato’s style of thinking. We can imagine people on either extreme of realism/idealism arguing (A) that 1 = 1 is an invention of our mathematical system, or (B) that Girl with a Pearl Earring is merely the discovery of the pre-existing fact that that pattern of paint is pleasing. Likewise, as things stand now, I can copyright a map. There’s an obvious argument against this: I didn’t make what the map shows, and I can’t own the fact that land is the shape it is. And an obvious argument for it: it took real work to research, design, and produce, and this deserves a reward. I think that hackers generally tend to come down further on the first argument’s side than most people do.
  • carussell 16y ago
    it took real work to research, design, and produce, and this deserves a reward. That's not necessarily the US's position on copyright, either. See Bridgeman v. Corel.