This has become an interesting discussion ranging far beyond the narrow author's copyright discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
No, again that's not an idea; it's a PROCESS, and that's what patent law (as opposed to copyright law) is there to protect. And once again, you can't patent an idea. You can't protect the idea the it would be cool to have a house that's bigger on the inside that on the outside, but you can patent a practical method of building such houses.
We always end up at the same end result: that it's only concrete things: stories written down as books, or practical methods for building Tardis houses, that are legally-protectable intellectual property. Mere ideas are not IP.
|
Though the idea vs. practical method distinction does not always seem so clear, at least with regard to patents. I am thinking of some of the lawsuits Apple has brought against other companies for supposed infringement of patents that certainly appear to be patents for ideas or concepts, not practical implementations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HamsterRage
I'd also really doubt that your body would be considered as part of your "property rights". That would be covered under some other natural right. So the rest of that extension out to your time and labour has to go too.
|
Just to add in another facet to that I wonder where lies the, I believe still unsettled, question of who has what property rights to new medical advances based on cells or genetic material taken from an individual during medical treatment, in particular when that individual was never made aware of the potential for such money making discoveries?