Guys, the notion that a work cannot be protected if it concerns 'facts' is utter rubbish. Although I can't speak for copyright law in the rest of the world, this is how the system has developed in the UK, the legal precedent in this case being 'Ravenscroft v Herbert [1980]'. Ravenscroft wrote a factual book about the history of a spear, and James Herbert (famous horror writer) was accused of making a 'substantial taking' of the time and effort made in researching this spear by Ravenscroft, by writing a fictional story in which the spear (and the various details relating to it) appeared.
While it is mostly the 'expression' that is protected and not the idea (this is called the idea/expression dichotomy in the US), the skill and effort of the author is also considered in the UK, as it was in that case, and will almost certainly will be again in the present case. None of this relates to whether it is 'factual' or 'fiction'.
Having recently decided to look outside the IT industry due to a questionable future and unsatisfying opportunities for a young graduate here in London, I decided to look into the one profession that seemed to have a glittering future. The European Patent Attorney (specifically interested in the software side of things given my background). After applying to a number of London based firms, I had a series of interviews. I made the point of discussing European software Patents in each interview, at first using my understanding I had gained from Slashdot. However, in each case, I was fatally shot down as it transpired that the general understanding of Patent law here at Slashdot is horribly inaccurate and incomplete.
Basically, having discussed it at the length with the partners, the situation as I understand it is as follows:
1. While software patents aren't strictly legal in Europe, they are easily implemented anyway. This is done using a number of techniques including wrapping them up in 'technical processes' which are perfectly legal. There are currently a huge number of software patents that exist in Europe that have been implemented this way.
2. Of the ones that can't be wrapped up in this method, a large number of patents are set-up and currently pending the highly expected change in the law.
3. Everyone I spoke to was perfectly confident that software patents would eventually be implemented in line with the US. The European economy would be dependant on this in the long term. Also, the law change would not be retrospective so all previously used inventions (but not the ones currently pending) will be public domain.
4. They were all very aware of the 'open source crowd' and sympathised with their cause. They explained that if the law was changed, it would only prevent the open source crowd from copying other software and would not limit them from innovating.
However, when I mentioned the Microsoft 'double click' patent, they all laughed out loud and warned me these things were usually a thousand times more complicated and subtle than I had been led to believe. If, in the case of this Microsoft patent, it really was ridiculous, then it would instantly be shot down in court as soon as it was contested.
Anyway, IANAPA (yet!) but that is what I have learnt from my experiences. Feel free to correct me if I have missed points.
Funny you fention the MPAA. Piracy was rife even in the day of Shakespeare. He was regularly ripped off when 'pirates' would discretely write down the words to the play whilst watching and then open the same play up else where. It is still unclear whether some of the plays are originals or infact copies (usually with errors or missing scenes).
Heh heh. I've done this but on an entirely voluntary basis (duke of edinburgh award). After an entire day of seemingly random digging, hacking and slashing, we cheered up when we discovered a bed magic mushrooms... and after that I don't remember much anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Guys, the notion that a work cannot be protected if it concerns 'facts' is utter rubbish. Although I can't speak for copyright law in the rest of the world, this is how the system has developed in the UK, the legal precedent in this case being 'Ravenscroft v Herbert [1980]'. Ravenscroft wrote a factual book about the history of a spear, and James Herbert (famous horror writer) was accused of making a 'substantial taking' of the time and effort made in researching this spear by Ravenscroft, by writing a fictional story in which the spear (and the various details relating to it) appeared. While it is mostly the 'expression' that is protected and not the idea (this is called the idea/expression dichotomy in the US), the skill and effort of the author is also considered in the UK, as it was in that case, and will almost certainly will be again in the present case. None of this relates to whether it is 'factual' or 'fiction'.
Having recently decided to look outside the IT industry due to a questionable future and unsatisfying opportunities for a young graduate here in London, I decided to look into the one profession that seemed to have a glittering future. The European Patent Attorney (specifically interested in the software side of things given my background). After applying to a number of London based firms, I had a series of interviews. I made the point of discussing European software Patents in each interview, at first using my understanding I had gained from Slashdot. However, in each case, I was fatally shot down as it transpired that the general understanding of Patent law here at Slashdot is horribly inaccurate and incomplete. Basically, having discussed it at the length with the partners, the situation as I understand it is as follows: 1. While software patents aren't strictly legal in Europe, they are easily implemented anyway. This is done using a number of techniques including wrapping them up in 'technical processes' which are perfectly legal. There are currently a huge number of software patents that exist in Europe that have been implemented this way. 2. Of the ones that can't be wrapped up in this method, a large number of patents are set-up and currently pending the highly expected change in the law. 3. Everyone I spoke to was perfectly confident that software patents would eventually be implemented in line with the US. The European economy would be dependant on this in the long term. Also, the law change would not be retrospective so all previously used inventions (but not the ones currently pending) will be public domain. 4. They were all very aware of the 'open source crowd' and sympathised with their cause. They explained that if the law was changed, it would only prevent the open source crowd from copying other software and would not limit them from innovating. However, when I mentioned the Microsoft 'double click' patent, they all laughed out loud and warned me these things were usually a thousand times more complicated and subtle than I had been led to believe. If, in the case of this Microsoft patent, it really was ridiculous, then it would instantly be shot down in court as soon as it was contested. Anyway, IANAPA (yet!) but that is what I have learnt from my experiences. Feel free to correct me if I have missed points.
Funny you fention the MPAA. Piracy was rife even in the day of Shakespeare. He was regularly ripped off when 'pirates' would discretely write down the words to the play whilst watching and then open the same play up else where. It is still unclear whether some of the plays are originals or infact copies (usually with errors or missing scenes).
Heh heh. I've done this but on an entirely voluntary basis (duke of edinburgh award). After an entire day of seemingly random digging, hacking and slashing, we cheered up when we discovered a bed magic mushrooms... and after that I don't remember much anyway.