So if you make something that so much as uses a shopping cart you violate 394 patents, but if you grab the manual and make something virtually identical you're in violation of no copyright?
I get that patents != copyright, but we're still entering a rather strange state of affairs...
Not just investors. Anyone I've met that even mentors startups or works with them through government programmes here pushes for patents on everything. It's annoying to see for someone aware of how badly patents and patent trolls are screwing up the software industry.
It's always been the case that you can accidentally violate patents but generally can't accidentally violate a copyright. That isn't a state we're entering — it's inherent in the two concepts.
Actually them being separate and distinct things is the right and proper way of the world and better than a confused blurred mess of "intellectual property".
Truly innovative ideas: Patent and 20 years protection at some cost and significant paperwork.
Duplication or derivative of an expression (whether source code or binary files): Copyright and a long protection (too long but that is a separate topic) of that expression and derivatives of it.
Creative and unique design: Registered design (Design patent in US) fairly weak and narrow protection, not sure of the duration.
Copyright should be narrow protection as this case supports. That doesn't mean that no other protections should be applied to creative works.
Comments
So if you make something that so much as uses a shopping cart you violate 394 patents, but if you grab the manual and make something virtually identical you're in violation of no copyright?
I get that patents != copyright, but we're still entering a rather strange state of affairs...
As a UK/EU citizen, this has always been my understanding of the law, and it's not strange to me.
I might violate US patent law (which is an increasing concern given the apparent freedom of extradition), but I'm not violating UK law.
There is copyright over my writing (here, lines of code), but typically not over my idea.
This is in the UK, not Texas.
AFAIK, software patent trolling isn't very bad in the UK
Very bad? I thought we didn't recognise software patents how could it even be possible? US Import law maybe?
No software patents in Europe (well, not officially anyway).
Yeah, but european investors ask for patents right off the bat...
Not just investors. Anyone I've met that even mentors startups or works with them through government programmes here pushes for patents on everything. It's annoying to see for someone aware of how badly patents and patent trolls are screwing up the software industry.
It's always been the case that you can accidentally violate patents but generally can't accidentally violate a copyright. That isn't a state we're entering — it's inherent in the two concepts.
Actually them being separate and distinct things is the right and proper way of the world and better than a confused blurred mess of "intellectual property".
Truly innovative ideas: Patent and 20 years protection at some cost and significant paperwork.
Duplication or derivative of an expression (whether source code or binary files): Copyright and a long protection (too long but that is a separate topic) of that expression and derivatives of it.
Creative and unique design: Registered design (Design patent in US) fairly weak and narrow protection, not sure of the duration.
Copyright should be narrow protection as this case supports. That doesn't mean that no other protections should be applied to creative works.
In Europe one cannot patent shopping cart.
In Soviet Europe, shopping cart patents you!
Finally, someone did this! :D
(easy on the downvotes, it's just a little bit of humour, people)