4 ms·
> If you invent something, say, a new battery, and somebody else copies it, You should distinguish the concepts of copyright and patent. A hardware design, lik
by segfaultbuserr 6y ago
> If you invent something, say, a new battery, and somebody else copies it,
You should distinguish the concepts of copyright and patent. A hardware design, like a battery, is not copyrightable in general. The technical drawings or a written description can be copyrighted, but the abstract technology and process cannot. Under copyright laws, it's illegal for me to duplicate your documents, but there is nothing to stop me from reverse-engineering or duplicating the same process or hardware [0], and I'm also allowed to write about this technology in my own words. Only patent laws can grant a period of exclusive control of an abstract technology to its inventors.
[0] If I obtained your documents illegally, it would be trade secret infringement, which is an independent issue from copyright nor patent.
- luckylion 6y agoSure, patents are a different thing, but they serve a similar purpose. "If you don't have to to the research and invest in creating the technology by copying, you can do it cheaper which the market will reward" is what both copyright and patents are created to change.
- imtringued 6y agoThey don't serve a similar purpose. Copyright protects authorship. Patents protect against reinvention. It's clear that Oracle needs a patent unless Google outright stole the standard library.
- az226 6y agoNews at 11, they did. In seriousness, they didn’t copy the libraries just once, but at least 3 times over time as Oracle continued to make investments in changes and additions to the libraries.