[ale] Stallman: Still the True Champion of Intellectual Freedom

[Scott Plante]

Well, the implementation is copyrighted but the method is patented. You could get a copyright on a piece of software that you couldn't patent (prior art, patent expired, etc.), but that wouldn't stop someone else from coding another version from scratch--a so-called "clean-room implementation". This is just meant to answer your question about the difference, not defend the software patents as they exist today! I don't claim to be an expert, but that's my understanding of it. 

Scott 
----- Original Message -----

From: "Pete Hardie" <pete.hardie at gmail.com> 
To: "Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts" <ale at ale.org> 
Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2012 7:11:24 PM 
Subject: Re: [ale] Stallman: Still the True Champion of Intellectual Freedom 

I was wondering recently why software, which is pretty much universally agreed to be subject to copyright (hell, Copyleft depen ds on it being so), is still allowed to be subject to patents - are those not contradictory stances? Patents protect things which cannot be copyrighted. 


Pete Hardie 
-------- 
Better Living Through Bitmaps 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20121126/7eb6158c/attachment.html>