On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 07:02:07PM +0100, Emile van Bergen wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 11:47:52AM -0600, John Hasler wrote: > > > Emile van Bergen writes: > > > I'd say that the definition of Unicode, heck even ASCII, involves a fair > > > amount of creativity. > > > > I don't doubt that the development of Unicode involved creativity: under > > current law it probably qualifies as a patentable invention. Inventions > > and ideas, however, cannot be copyrighted: only creative works reduced to > > tangible form can. I'm arguing that the _creation_ _of_ _that_ _table_ > > involved no creativity, not that the invention of Unicode didn't. > > Well, so you say that if I write a novel, all my creativity is in the > abstract idea; putting the words down involved no extra creativity; thus > the sequence of words cannot be copyrighted? Copyright _cannot_ be applied to ideas, only the implementation or physical representation of thost ideas. (I can't copyright "an mp3 player" but I can copyright "The mp3 player I wrote".) A patent however, applies to a new process or invention, which will usually encompass an idea more strongly. (I can patent "A method of turning mp3s into sound" as long as no-one else has done it that way before.) Patents are civil actions, while copyright violation is criminal, so copyright _has_ to be more limited than patents since there's more punishment and less recourse. -- ----------------------------------------------------------- Paul "TBBle" Hampson, MCSE 5th year CompSci/Asian Studies student, ANU The Boss, Bubblesworth Pty Ltd (ABN: 51 095 284 361) Paul.Hampson@Anu.edu.au Of course Pacman didn't influence us as kids. If it did, we'd be running around in darkened rooms, popping pills and listening to repetitive music. This email is licensed to the recipient for non-commercial use, duplication and distribution. -----------------------------------------------------------
Attachment:
pgp_2E2HpcLSS.pgp
Description: PGP signature