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