*BSD News Article 7516


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.org.eff.talk:9813 misc.int-property:761 comp.unix.bsd:7566
Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!sgiblab!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wupost!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!agate!dog.ee.lbl.gov!news!nosc!ryptyde!jim
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property,alt.suit.att-bsdi,comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Interface monopolies
From: jim@netlink.cts.com (Jim Bowery)
Message-ID: <JgqTTB1w165w@netlink.cts.com>
References: <id.D9PU._Z1@ferranti.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 92 07:34:42 PST
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA
Lines: 19

peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes:

> In article <R0ZPTB3w165w@netlink.cts.com> jim@netlink.cts.com (Jim Bowery) wr
> > guidance.  What I'm saying is that if you don't have a design patent on
> > your interface, you should have no standing to defend it.
> 
> fields (commercial art, for example) styling and format *have* been
> protected by copyright for a long time. A classic case is the typical
> copyright on greeting cards and lines of greeting cards. Similar designs,
> even under quite broad definitions of similarity, have been found to
> violate copyrights. Similarly, there is a copyright that has been defended
Design patents exist so that the utility of a form or formalism can be
owned and defended.  Much that is copyrighted should be patented instead.
The "style" aspect of an interface isn't patentable but its utility is.

--                    
INTERNET:  jim@netlink.cts.com (Jim Bowery)
UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!jim
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115