templon@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (jeffrey templon) (04/25/91)
In article <1991Apr24.132201.29077@cs.utk.edu> nall@cs.utk.edu (John Nall) writes: >So far as algorithms go, my understanding is that you CAN't patent them. >But of course you can copyright a particular implementation of one. > If my understanding is correct, then yours is not. Algorithms CAN be patented and HAVE been. A good pair of examples is (1) LZW compression and (2) 'backing store' as used in X-Windows. If you follow gnu.misc.discuss you will see a lot of discussion about this; this sort of concern is primarily what the League for Programming Freedom is all worried about, and with good reason I would think. AT&T has recently contacted all distributors of X-Windows server implementations, saying that their debt to AT&T needs to be assessed, since they are using X-Windows which uses the *proprietary* technology "backing store". This *technology* must be licensed from AT&T. Excerpts from the patent claim on the LZW compression algorithm were posted to gnu.misc.discuss a while back. One of the things they claimed were original in the document was essentially initializing an array to have all zero values before using it!! Cutting edge! If this concerns you, please inquire on gnu.misc.discuss about joining the League for Programming Freedom. This sort of stuff is the wave of the future unless there is action taken to stop it. Most lawyers, judges etc. have too little knowledge about such things to make good decisions on their own, and mostly now their technical assistance is coming for companies like AT&T!! jt