I think only inventions can be patented.  For example you can't patent a chair 
or a building because a chair is a concept as is a building.  But you can 
patent a unique and new device that makes the chair recline, say, or an 
architectural device that enables facade surfaces to be attached to the frame 
in a new way. You can patent a formula for, say, a soft drink, but if you do 
you must make your formula public and thus a competitor might legally use that 
same formula with somke insignificant change of ingredients.  That's why 
Coca-Cola for instance is not patented, but the formula is a closely held 
secret.  Look at a typical houshold cleanser by a big company like Proctor and 
Gamble.  Note that many patents for the product are listed, maybe dozens.  They 
protect themselves by patenting every possible viable variation of the formula, 
effectively owning all the potential competition products before they are made. 

You can register a trademark a name for a product or logo but may face costly 
legal issues if the name is too much like another trademarked product name in 
the same product group or is even too much like a another TM product in a very 
different product group.  Getting a trademark registered can be very costly 
because of the legal searches and possible licensing required. You can put TM 
after tyour product name even if you've not registered it in order to test the 
likelihood that it is already a trademark somewhere. I believe there are 
restrictions to that.

You can copyright a created work of your own or you can assign copyright to 
another. This protects use of the created work in a variety of ways. Artists 
should copyright their work to prevent others from altering it, reproducing it, 
or using it in some way that harms its aesthetic or market value, including 
taking that value from the artist. If someone were to take your short story and 
extract a few lines to use on a printed greeting card or to use as the script 
for a movie or in an ad or take your painting and reproduce it to have it serve 
some purpose you don't like, your copyright protects you.  When someone "uses" 
your uncopyrighted artwork you can be almost certain it's not to your advantage 
and may in fact harm your reputation and art values.  Humans are predators.

Art and artists need the same legal protections that all producers and products 
have. Any object in the world can (be assigned) potential or existing value and 
aesthetic/symbolic quality.  How that fact is recognized and protected for one 
and all (from point of creation to public domain) is crucially important in a 
civilized society and market-based economy.
wc    


--- On Mon, 2/23/09, Chris Miller <[email protected]> wrote:

> From: Chris Miller <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: It only makes sense that you would borro w from the past,  take 
> w  hats best, what evoke s a response in yourself from the past,  what ca 
> ptivates you, and put your spin on it. I see it as a go
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Monday, February 23, 2009, 3:52 PM
> >And books, and poems, and all kinds of other
> "patented" stuff.( might be
> impossible to produce - according to Cheerskep)
> 
> 
> But there are so many important examples to contrary,
> aren't there?
> 
> Including everything written (in England)  before 1710, and
> even your beloved
> Jane Austen.
> 
> The only expense involved in writing is time -- and
> somehow, and many great
> things seem to have found an audience without copyright
> protection.
> 
> 
> Today, with the internet, there is zero expense involved in
> making manuscripts
> of any length available to everyone on the planet (other
> than bush people,
> that is)
> 
> Copyright is not necessary for the arts -- but only for
> those who want to make
> money from reproductions.
> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> Purify your water with professional water treatment. Click
> now!
> http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/BLSrjnxWi0WOZbCMxgcpNEWG4XS8NX
> 0qTGn4rxof4CvLepXGHN6XhsB3s0g/

Reply via email to