View Single Post
Old 05-27-2016, 02:32 PM   #16
latepaul
Wizard
latepaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.latepaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.latepaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.latepaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.latepaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.latepaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.latepaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.latepaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.latepaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.latepaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.latepaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
latepaul's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,270
Karma: 10468300
Join Date: Dec 2011
Device: a variety (mostly kindles and kobos)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8 View Post
The obvious solution is that software is not copyrightable. As a programmer, I know that every piece of software is built on top of someone else's software. That's the way programming works, you use common patterns that have been used by everyone for years. It's pretty obvious that copyright was intended for individual works of art. The idea that software was copyrightable was simply a lawyer's construction in an attempt to create a barrier against other people entering their market.
I'm also a programmer. I think software should be copyrightable but algorithms ("common patterns") should not. They should be protected by patents if they contain significant amount of ingenuity, but the bar should be higher than it is at present sadly. Patenting "one-click" buy should not be possible.
latepaul is offline   Reply With Quote