On 2008-10-03, greg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Steven D'Aprano
>> wrote:
>>
>> > (2) Even when the source is available, it is sometimes a legal trap to
>> > read it with respect to patents and copyright.
>>
>> That's not how patents work.
>
> I don't think that's how copyrights work either. As far as
> I know, whether something is deemed a derivative work is
> judged on the basis of how similar it is to another work,
> not whether its author had knowledge of the other work.
> As long as you express an idea in an original way, it
> shouldn't matter where you got the idea from.
IANAL, but IIRC it does matter when it comes to establishing
punative damages. If you knowingly and intentionally infringe
a patent, I think you're libel for more damages than if you
accidentally re-invent something. At least that's what I was
told...
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Thousands of days of
at civilians ... have produced
visi.com a ... feeling for the
aesthetic modules --
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
