Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!ll-xn!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!cornell!rochester!pt.cs.cmu.edu!ius3.ius.cs.cmu.edu!ralphw
From: ralphw@ius3.ius.cs.cmu.edu (Ralph Hyre)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Intellectual property/copyrights
Message-ID: <2096@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: 28 Jun 88 15:39:00 GMT
References: <9160@cisunx.UUCP> <1801@uhccux.UUCP> <807@netxcom.UUCP> <501@novavax.UUCP> <309@proxftl.UUCP>
Sender: netnews@pt.cs.cmu.edu
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
Lines: 52

In article <309@proxftl.UUCP> jesse@proxftl.UUCP (Jesse Perry) writes:
>
>In article <501@novavax.UUCP>, maddoxt@novavax.UUCP (Thomas Maddox) writes:
>> [Stuff about which kinds of copyright violations upset authors]
>>
>>       (As an aside, I believe most of us are committed in some way
>> to the free flow of information; we feel that a culture which
>> generates such a flow is a more open and civilized culture than one
>> which does not.  Thus, we may be caught on the point where the right
>> to personal property conflicts with this more general principle that
>> dissemination of information is a good thing.)
>
>I am committed to the free flow of information, or more specifically, of
>*ideas*.  Copyright law does not treat *ideas* as intellectual property.
>An idea cannot be copyrighted; only a particular expression of an idea
>can be.
>
>For example, Lotus Corp. has copyrighted a particular expression (the
>1-2-3 program) of the *idea* of a spreadsheet program.  Nonetheless, the
>idea of a spreadsheet program is still freely and legally available to
>anyone interested, and anyone who wishes can write a spreadsheet program
>of his or her own.
>
>Thus, the enforcement of personal property rights by copyright law does
>not conflict with the free flow of information.

Well, I consider that copyright protects intellectual property rights
rather than personal property rights.  My stand on intellectual property
rights is still evolving, so I won't say anything about them.  I feel
somehow that they have different characteristics, which makes it hard
for me to feel that they deserve the same protections.

Anyway, it does interfere with free flow, since I can't give a copy of
something I have to someone else without worrying about copyright violation.

There are bad precedents being set these days.
Once you have legal support for a concept such as copyright, plus a surplus
of lawyers, it encourages foolishness of the sort that Apple practiced when
it filed against HP as well as MicroSoft, apparently because it New Wave has
configurable widgets that let it 'look and feel' like a Mac.  

If 'look and feel' is copyrighteable, can 'functionality and performance'
lawsuits be far behind?

[Sorry, you can't write something that reads Appleworks format spreadsheet 
files, that would violate our 'functionality' copyright.  BTW, you can't write
in assembler code anymore, your benchmarks times are too close to ours.
Rewrite it in pascal or something.]
-- 
					- Ralph W. Hyre, Jr.

Internet: ralphw@ius2.cs.cmu.edu    Phone:(412)268-{2847,3275} CMU-{BUGS,DARK}
Amateur Packet Radio: N3FGW@W2XO, or c/o W3VC, CMU Radio Club, Pittsburgh, PA