FW: [Sussex] Copyright - Left etc.

[Geoff Teale]

> ok.... As I don't know much about this subject.
> 
> Going on to the recent moves by EU to introduce software "Patents", how does
> a patent make it more difficult for the "Free" software philosophy which is
> behind Linux? Im sure you will tell me that Patenting is different from
> Copyright.  However, again surely, the author should be in control of
> his/her own IP?  Or is it down to the cost and complexity incurred by
> Patents?


Patents don't affect your control of your copyright.  A patent is about
protection of processes.

Example:
If you and I both sit down and write a new word processor each (yours
could be AngeloWrite, and mine could be TealeType).  We would both own
the copyright on our own work (so long as you hadn't actually copied my
code directly), but if I had a patent on the process of "word
processing" then I could force you to pay me royalties on it.  It
wouldn't effect your ownership or copyright at all.

Now in the field of open source software we have an example of this: DVD
decoding.  It is very hard to give away a DVD decoder for free because
the process of DVD decoding is patented and the patent holders will
charge anyone who wishes to use or distribute a DVD decoding process. 
Now, DeCSS is kind of special though because the process it uses for
decryption is quite different from the patented process.  When you are
granted a patent on something you are required to specify the process in
detail, this requirement is there to aid science, to stop accidental
patent infringement and to make sure that we can tell for sure whether a
patent really applies to some new process.

One problem with software patents in the USA is that the patent office
have been extremely bad at getting enough detail into software patents
(broad sweeping patents have been allowed through, simply because patent
clerks didn't understand them).

-- 
GJT 
gteale at cmedltd.com 
-- 
The Beatles: Paul McCartney's old back-up band.