Re: Patent clauses in licenses
MJ Ray writes:
> On 2004-09-24 13:37:42 +0100 Michael Poole <mdpoole@troilus.org> wrote:
>
> > Computer programs, by their nature, combine both copyrightable and
> > patentable elements.
>
> Mathematical relationships are discoveries, not inventions. Similarly
> algorithms: the right one existed, but you just didn't know
> it. Expressions of algorithms are covered by copyright. There is not
> necessarily any construction or fabrication, either real or
> imagined. So computer programs, by their nature, contain no patentable
> elements under English law.
Your (claimed) law is not everyone's law. It's silly to ignore the
case of the US (and apparently Australia[1], most of Asia[2, pg 25],
and others), since a significant number of mirrors, developers, and
users are there. A number of other courts, including the German
Supreme Court[2, pg 13], have held that computer programs can infringe
patents.
[1]- http://old.linux.org.au/papers/no-patents.html
[2]- http://www.slwk.com/CM/PhoneSeminars/asia.pdf
Michael Poole
Reply to: