Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.org.eff.talk:9834 misc.int-property:763 comp.unix.bsd:7604
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,misc.int-property,alt.suit.att-bsdi,comp.unix.bsd
Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!rpi!psinntp!psinntp!ficc!peter
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Subject: Re: Interface monopolies
Message-ID: <id.9JSU.7L6@ferranti.com>
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
References: <id.D9PU._Z1@ferranti.com> <JgqTTB1w165w@netlink.cts.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 02:47:50 GMT
Lines: 17
In article <R0ZPTB3w165w@netlink.cts.com> jim@netlink.cts.com (Jim Bowery):
> 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.
I responded that existing practice *outside* computer software says otherwise.
In article <JgqTTB1w165w@netlink.cts.com> jim@netlink.cts.com (Jim Bowery) writes:
> 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.
OK, but prior art (in another sense) says that this isn't the case. How do
we get there from here?
--
% Peter da Silva % 77487-5012 % +1 713 274 5180 %
true(<<VV$@\\$'&O 9$O%'$LT$&$"V6"$&$<4$?'&$ #I&&?$=$<<@)24 24 scale 3 21 moveto
{dup 36 eq{pop not}{dup 7 and 4 sub exch 56 and 8 div 4 sub 2 index{rlineto}{
rmoveto}ifelse}ifelse}forall stroke pop showpage % Har du kramat din varg idag?