Re: IRAF component relicensed
Raul Miller <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Sun, Dec 19, 2004 at 03:45:40PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
>> This is probably hotly debated, but how do math-algorthm copyrights
> Articles about mathematics, and specific expressions of algorithms,
> are copyrightable, but the concepts aren't.
> In the U.S. 17 USC 102 states:
> In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship
> extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation,
> concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it
> is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.
> In international law, article 2 of the Berne convention states:
> It shall, however, be a matter for legislation in the countries of the
> Union to prescribe that works in general or any specified categories
> of works shall not be protected unless they have been fixed in some
> material form.
> Which I think meant that the rules could vary from country to country.
> However, WIPO has since come out and stated (in article 2 of the treaty):
> Copyright protection extends to expressions and not to ideas,
> procedures, methods of operation or mathematical concepts as such.
> Is that clear enough?
And this is probably the reason we have thousands of (probably
invalid) software patents instead.