From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262033AbTD2Q3j (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Apr 2003 12:29:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262037AbTD2Q3j (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Apr 2003 12:29:39 -0400 Received: from relay01.valueweb.net ([216.219.253.235]:17074 "EHLO relay01.valueweb.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262033AbTD2Q3g (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Apr 2003 12:29:36 -0400 Message-ID: <3EAEAB43.3030208@coyotegulch.com> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 12:41:39 -0400 From: Scott Robert Ladd User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030327 Debian/1.3-4 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Why DRM exists [was Re: Flame Linus to a crisp!] References: <20030427183553.GA955879@hiwaay.net> <20030427185037.GA23581@work.bitmover.com> <20030427220717.GA24991@willow.seitz.com> <20030427223255.GH23068@work.bitmover.com> <20030428200424.GA9252@citd.de> <20030428201816.GB23581@work.bitmover.com> <1051568160.17370.3.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> <20030429000904.GA9653@work.bitmover.com> <20030429055930.GA2645@think> In-Reply-To: <20030429055930.GA2645@think> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Theodore Ts'o wrote: > Well, there is the question about whether Microsoft would really want > a law which made it illegal to duplicate the (unpatented) design of a > competitor's product, given that Microsoft does that *all* the time. The law is not applied equally, however. Microsoft has the resources to fight any action taken against it; thus, a law that restricts you (with your limited resources) may not hinder Microsoft at all. > In the business world, engineers purchase competitors' products and > rip them apart to see what makes them tick *all* *the* *time*. Ford > does it GM cars, and Crystler does it to Toyota cars, etc., etc. > Anything important where they don't want that to happen is patented. Precisely. I've done this myself with various pieces of technology. The problem is a broken patent system that allows common knowledge to be "protected." I've strongly considered trying to get a patent on B-trees or QuickSort, just to see if the patent office is as foolish as they seem. The reason I can tear down the engine on my truck is because it poses no threat to the manufacturer; no one has a patent on the concept of a piston (though they may patent a specific *type* of piston.) The problem today is that the patent office will honor almost anything with a patent; if cars were software, Ford would have a patent on pistons that would prevent GM from building V-8s. There is nothing wrong with the original conception of patents and copyrights: the protection of IP creators to profit from their work before it enters the public domain in a reasonable time period. Sadly, corporations have legal rights, and the money to pervert the process. Patents and copyrights need to be fixed, not destroyed. ..Scott -- Scott Robert Ladd Coyote Gulch Productions (http://www.coyotegulch.com)