Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How Wolfram Alpha's Copyright Claims Could Change Software

Posted by timothy on from the my-patent-app-will-involve-prayer-wheels-and-combinatorics dept.

snydeq writes "Fatal Exception's Neil McAllister suggests that Wolfram Research's claim to copyright of results returned by the Wolfram Alpha engine could have significant ramifications for the software industry. 'While software companies routinely retain sole ownership of their software and license it to users, Wolfram Research has taken the additional step of claiming ownership of the output of the software itself,' McAllister writes, pointing out that it is 'at least theoretically possible to copyright works generated by machines.' And, under current copyright law, if any Wolfram claim to authorship of the output of its engine is upheld, by extension the same rules will apply to other information services in similar cases as well. In other words, 'If unique presentations based on software-based manipulation of mundane data are copyrightable, who retains what rights to the resulting works?'"

13 of 258 comments (clear)

  1. Re:They better not go there... by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 5, Funny

    We should be restraining copyright, not expanding it.

    Careful son, that's commie talk.

    --
    Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
  2. Re:They better not go there... by Anonymous+CowHardon · · Score: 2, Funny

    This opens Pandora's box like you wouldn't believe.

    Careful with that box, buddy. It's copyright Pandora. (As are its contents.)

  3. Monkey see, Monkey do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    That explains why there's an infinite number of monkeys out there claiming they own every copyright.

  4. Re:They better not go there... by T+Murphy · · Score: 3, Funny

    This opens Pandora's box like you wouldn't believe.

    Hey, that means Pandora owns all of that music, and no longer the RIAA. This could be revolutionary!

    --
    My webcomic
  5. Re:I hope Wolfram dies. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    SIr:

    Pissing on graves has been copyrighted by Wolfram Research, Inc. For each instance of pissing, a royalty fee of $563.87 will be paid to Wolfram Research, Inc.

    Sincerely,

    Wolfram.

  6. Anti-RIAA method! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    If this isn't a bogus claim, then just feed it your iTunes library. The sole copyright on the output would then be transferred to Wolfram. Wolfram could then upload all this music to some torrent for free.

  7. Ask the "knowledge engine" if it's original work by atomic_bomberman · · Score: 2, Funny

    Input: Is alpha original work?
    Ouput: "Wolfram|Alpha isn't sure what to do with your input."

    Seems worthy of copyright to me.

  8. Re:Claims or Tested in Court by Anonymous+CowHardon · · Score: 2, Funny

    Mathematica could be rebuilt in 5 years with a good focus.

    Mathematica hasn't released a decent album since Kill 'Em Algorithmically.

  9. Re:I hope Wolfram dies. by countertrolling · · Score: 3, Funny

    I hope he never dies. I don't want to see copyright carried over into the afterlife. If he does die, we would have to kill NYCL to chase him down.

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  10. There is no alpha engine by russotto · · Score: 3, Funny

    They've just trained teams of underpaid humans to answer the search results. That's how they get a valid copyright.

  11. Re:Here we go again by hyperion2010 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Wait, you're telling me the Shrek was the creation of a rogue 486 hyped up on 512mb of ram?! It all makes sense now!

  12. Re:The key word... by dshadowwolf · · Score: 3, Funny

    Okay, I'll admit that I'd missed that completely when I was talking to the lawyers and reading the law for myself.

  13. Re:They better not go there... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 4, Funny

    The guy who turns around and punches you in the face for coming up with a really stupid analogy.