3 ms·
In a lot of western countries that are not the US, software isn't copyrightable as-is, only as a description of its functionality or something like that (not a
by oneplane 5y ago
In a lot of western countries that are not the US, software isn't copyrightable as-is, only as a description of its functionality or something like that (not a lawyer, might have been the patent vs. copyright thing).
This difference means that a lot of what a litigation-centric society would assume about software (perhaps not copyright, but patents) doesn't apply elsewhere.
That said, the goals of the legal systems tend to converge: it was about protecting ideas so the people investing in it stand a chance to see a return. I wouldn't be surprised if there simply is a different system with a different name but with the same goal (yet being incompatible with a global blanket software copyright claim). I have only studied the subject for a small group of western european countries (France not included) and most of them not being based on common law makes quite the difference.
- nomel 5y agoCould someone explain why this was downvoted? I'm not familiar enough with any of this to understand.
- simonh 5y agoBecause it’s a horrible mess of confusion between copyrights and patents, and even says so, so it’s hard to see what the author was thinking even posting it.
- int_19h 5y agoI can't think of any Western country in which software is not copyrightable as-is. There are some where software is not patentable, but that is a very different thing that is not relevant to this story.
- chrismcb 5y agoMost countries are a signatury to the Berne Convention, so in general, copyright is pretty similar in those countries. Patents are a different story and different countries have different pantent laws.