|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 07 2013 @ 03:15 PM EDT |
He cannot infringe by using the invention only by copying it.
In copyright you can not infringe by reading a book (a book is supposed to be
read) only by copying it (that is the right that the author have).
When in doubt in the ideal case it helps to engage the brain. That is why we
have it!
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- You are mistaken - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 07 2013 @ 03:36 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 07 2013 @ 03:17 PM EDT |
Sure, you can commit crimes with a computer, or a copier, or a hammer, or a
submachine gun. That's not the problem with software patents.
Maybe it would be clearer if you thought of machine computations as thought. The
machine is assisting a human in some kind of simple thinking.
So the problem with software patents is that they affect THINKING. You can think
of killing someone by dropping a copier on them -- that is not a crime.
You can use a computer to figure out the best time to drop the copier on a
moving target--still not a crime.
There's no crime until there's an act.
Patents are similar, there is no patent until there is a device or process. Any
logical thinking involved (human or device-aided) can't break the law.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|