Question about documentation and patents
Matthew Flaschen
matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu
Thu Dec 13 21:41:38 UTC 2007
Chris Travers wrote:
> On Dec 9, 2007 8:08 AM, Grayg Ralphsnyder <wgrayg at mountain.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> I think that documentation would be covered by copyright and not
>> license. A listing of the actual source code would be covered by the
>> same license as the actual software. If the source code is included in
>> the documentation, is the documentation in its entirety covered by the
>> source code license? That "increase the value of the variable a by one"
>> is an algorithm. What to do with that - copyright, license ? What if
>> it was the algorithm (method) for Fourier Transform ?
>
>
> ok, suppose I release documentation under the GNU GPL and document (via
> source code samples) a method under which I have a patent.
>
> I would argue that the GPL v2's implied patent licenses would certainly
> *not* apply here since mere use (i.e. reading, etc) of the documentation
> doesn't violate my patent.
I agree. Use of documentation is reading and referring to it. Use of
software is running it. "Reading and referring" are actions that can't
infringe a patent (except for rare cases, like the patented XML schema
example mentioned). Running a program can infringe a patent.
Even if the documentation contains code, that code can't be run as is,
so there's no license to do so.
I will so that this discussion casts more doubt on whether literary
works (software is copyrightable in the U.S. because it has been ruled
to be a literary work) should be patentable.
Matt Flaschen
More information about the License-discuss
mailing list