houpt@svax.cs.cornell.edu (Charles (Chuck) Houpt) (02/27/89)
Is Turing under copyright or is it in the public domain? More generally: How do programming languages fit into the current intellectual property laws? Programming languages don't seem to fit into any of the standard categories, such as copyright or patent. I know that Pascal is public domain because N. Wirth explicitly said so. But what about other languages like C, Ada, Fortran etc? Can anyone shed light on these questions? -Chuck Houpt HOUPT@SVAX.CS.CORNELL.EDU
cordy@qucis.queensu.CA (Jim Cordy) (02/28/89)
houpt@svax.cs.cornell.edu (Charles (Chuck) Houpt) asks: >Is Turing under copyright or is it in the public domain? >More generally: How do programming languages fit into the >current intellectual property laws? Programming languages >don't seem to fit into any of the standard categories, such >as copyright or patent. My understanding is that there is nothing about a programming language per se that can be copyrighted or patented, and thus there is no protection for the language itself. You can copyright the language definition, for example the Turing language report, but you cannot copyright the Turing language any more than you can copyright English. In this sense all programming languages are in the public domain. The *name* of the language can however be trademarked, and that is the typical way of protecting from, say, unscrupulous language implementors. For example, you can build an Ada compiler if you like, and publish a language spec for it that is isomorphic to Ada, but you cannot *call* it Ada unless you get the permission of the trademark holder. The main reason for doing this is to insure that implementations called by the language name actually implement the language as specified. In the case of Ada, this is tested using a validation suite of programs. The name of the Turing language, like the name Ada, is trademarked. Jim Cordy Queen's University at Kingston Cordy@QueensU.CA cordy@qucis.bitnet cordy%qucis.bitnet@cunyvm.cuny.edu (The opinions expressed above are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of Holt Software Associates Inc., Queen's University or the University of Toronto.)
c08_d103@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Ex-God) (03/02/89)
Jim Cordy says: >The *name* of the language can however be trademarked, and that >is the typical way of protecting from, say, unscrupulous language >implementors. For example, you can build an Ada compiler if >you like, and publish a language spec for it that is isomorphic >to Ada, but you cannot *call* it Ada unless you get the permission >of the trademark holder. The main reason for doing this is to >insure that implementations called by the language name actually >implement the language as specified. In the case of Ada, this is >tested using a validation suite of programs. Question: Are Forth and C trademarked names? I've seen PD implementations of both Forth and C that I'm pretty sure were never checked with anyone (or at least never checked in any detail whatsoever). Will they allow names like C to be trademarked? (I guess if "Real" and "Good Food" have been trademarked in dairy and food products, "C" isn't any more of a common word or anything....) Further question: If Forth is a trademarked name, does GraForth (for example), need to be checked? (Especially since it's only a loosely equivalent language). -- Andy Matter ins_balb@jhunix/ins_balb@jhuvms/c08_d103@jhunix The opinions expressed in this message are yours. "If you can't stand the Big Chill, burn down the freezer." -- Jello Biafra