Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 10 Apr 1998 14:37:56 +1000 | | From | Dancer <> | | Subject | Re: [offtopic] Re: CocaCola not really a secret |
| |
Joseph Malicki wrote: > > xombi@accessus.net wrote: > > > On Sun, 5 Apr 1998, MOLNAR Ingo wrote: > > > > > On 5 Apr 1998, Chris Adams wrote: > > > > > > > The formula for Coca-Cola has never been patented, because then it would > > > > be made public. When you patent something, it is published. Think > > > > about it: how else could people know if they are infringing? > > > > > > The formula for Coca-Cola is a trade secret. If it is ever "leaked", > > > > then whoever leaked it will be in big trouble, but once it is public, > > > > anyone can use it. > > > > And the difference between a trade secret and a patent is big, as patents only > > apply to unique mechanical designs and "drink mixtures" don't qualify.... > > > > To keep this on topic, it's important to point out that "software" CANNOT be > > patented, it can only be copyrighted. Hardware CAN be patented. Most > > commercial software (meaning no source, of course) is still technically a > > trade secret tho, isn't it, even when copyrighted? > > I don't claim to be a copyright expert, but AFAIK, while an individual software > package cannot be patented, an ALGORITHM can..... isn't that what the whole big > thing about GIF code being taken out of shareware programs several years ago?
Correct. Three countries perpetuate this absurdity: Japan, USA, Switzerland (to the best of my most recent knowledge).
In Japan, for example, the method of using XOR to draw mouse-pointers over backgrounds has been patented (about in 1989, I think) and everyone there using that method must pay a licensing fee. Bizarre, yes. Stupid, I know. But actually done.
In the USA, RSADSI have patented procedure for applying a mathematical formula (an algorithm) which essentially binds up the RSA algorithm under license until the patent expires. Having written code to that algorithm (in this country, I hasten to point out), and having had the patent documents next to me, comparing the steps, I couldn't find any way to do it without infringing on the patent. They got that one pretty tight.
For god's sake...someone patent adding 2 and 2 to manufacture the result four. It's no _less_ absurd, and maybe all the license fees from the education system, and PTA groups, might fund a battle against this lunacy.
D
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
|  |