PCT (Patents, Copyright, Trademark) policy and Open Source

Russell McOrmond russell at flora.ca
Mon Feb 2 14:32:15 UTC 2004

On Sun, 1 Feb 2004, Danese Cooper wrote:

> I know that some of the bigger firms in the US are explicitly 
> copyrighting their briefs.

  Having a copyright on an expression of an information process is very
different than having a patent on the process itself.  As long as you
don't infringe on their copy then you have no problem with a copyright,
but with a patent it applies to all ways to express a given information

  Given the need to publish precedent with the legal system (a form of
"open source") the copyright on these briefs would have to be licensed
adequately open already.

  I do believe that problems created in computer software ends up showing
up in other fields.  We need to eradicate information process patents here
before it causes more serious damage in other more critical aspects of our
society (legal system, electoral/parliamentary system,
governance/democracy, etc - "code is law").

 Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <http://www.flora.ca/> 
 Governance software that controls ICT, automates government policy, or
 electronically counts votes, shouldn't be bought any more than 
 politicians should be bought.  -- http://www.flora.ca/russell/

license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3

More information about the License-discuss mailing list