www/philosophy software-literary-patents.html

[Richard M. Stallman]

CVSROOT:        /webcvs/www
Module name:    www
Changes by:     Richard M. Stallman <rms>       09/12/15 15:44:44

Modified files:
        philosophy     : software-literary-patents.html 

Log message:
        Minor cleanup.
        Change copyright to Richard Stallman.

CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/software-literary-patents.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.18&r2=1.19

Patches:
Index: software-literary-patents.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /webcvs/www/www/philosophy/software-literary-patents.html,v
retrieving revision 1.18
retrieving revision 1.19
diff -u -b -r1.18 -r1.19
--- software-literary-patents.html      11 Jul 2009 12:02:11 -0000      1.18
+++ software-literary-patents.html      15 Dec 2009 15:44:40 -0000      1.19
@@ -15,9 +15,9 @@
 <p>by <strong><a href="http://stallman.org/";>Richard Stallman</a></strong></p>
 
 <p>
-<em>A version of this article was first published in <cite>The
-Guardian</cite>, of London, on June 20, 2005.  It focused on the
-proposed European software patent directive.</em></p>
+<em>The first version of this article was published in
+the <cite>Guardian</cite>, of London, on June 20, 2005.  It focused on
+the proposed European software patent directive.</em></p>
 
 <p>
 When politicians consider the question of software patents, they are
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@
 impassioned defense of copyright law, praising Victor Hugo for his
 role in the adoption of copyright.  (The misleading
 term <a href="/philosophy/not-ipr.html"> &ldquo;intellectual
-property&rdquo;</a>, promotes this confusion&mdash;one reason it
+property&rdquo;</a> promotes this confusion&mdash;one of the reasons it
 should never be used.)
 </p>
 
@@ -51,13 +51,13 @@
 </p>
 
 <p>
-Consider the novel, Les Mis&eacute;rables, which Hugo wrote.  Since he
-wrote it, the copyright belonged only to him&mdash;nobody else.  He
+Consider Victor Hugo's novel, <cite> Les Mis&eacute;rables</cite>.  Since he
+wrote it, the copyright belonged only to him.  He
 did not have to fear that some stranger could sue him for copyright
 infringement and win.  That was impossible, because copyright covers
 only the details of a work of authorship, not the ideas embodied in
-them, and it only restricts copying.  Hugo had not copied Les
-Mis&eacute;rables, so he was not in danger from copyright.
+them, and it only restricts copying.  Hugo had not copied <cite>Les
+Mis&eacute;rables</cite>, so he was not in danger from copyright.
 </p>
 
 <p>
@@ -80,7 +80,7 @@
 </ul>
 
 <p>
-If such a patent had existed in 1862 when Les Mis&eacute;rables was
+If such a patent had existed in 1862 when <cite>Les Mis&eacute;rables</cite> 
was
 published, the novel would have conflicted with all three claims,
 since all these things happened to Jean Valjean in the novel.  Victor
 Hugo could have been sued, and if sued, he would have lost.  The novel
@@ -99,7 +99,7 @@
 </ul>
 
 <p>
-Les Mis&eacute;rables would have been prohibited by that patent too,
+<cite>Les Mis&eacute;rables</cite> would have been prohibited by that patent 
too,
 because this description too fits the life story of Jean Valjean.  And
 here's another hypothetical patent:
 </p>
@@ -115,11 +115,11 @@
 </p>
 
 <p>
-These three patents would all cover the story of one character in a
-novel.  They overlap, but they do not precisely duplicate each other,
+All three patents would cover, and prohibit, the life story of this one
+character.  They overlap, but they do not precisely duplicate each other,
 so they could all be valid simultaneously; all three patent holders
 could have sued Victor Hugo.  Any one of them could have prohibited
-publication of Les Mis&eacute;rables.
+publication of <cite>Les Mis&eacute;rables</cite>.
 </p>
 
 <p>
@@ -146,13 +146,14 @@
 </p>
 
 <p>
-Other aspects of Les Mis&eacute;rables could also have run afoul of
+Other aspects of <cite>Les Mis&eacute;rables</cite> could also have
+run afoul of
 patents.  For instance, there could have been a patent on a
 fictionalized portrayal of the Battle of Waterloo, or a patent on
 using Parisian slang in fiction.  Two more lawsuits.  In fact, there
 is no limit to the number of different patents that might have been
-applicable for suing the author of a work such as Les
-Mis&eacute;rables.  All the patent holders would say they deserved a
+applicable for suing the author of a work such as <cite>Les
+Mis&eacute;rables</cite>.  All the patent holders would say they deserved a
 reward for the literary progress that their patented ideas represent,
 but these obstacles would not promote progress in literature, they
 would only obstruct it.
@@ -164,7 +165,7 @@
 </p>
 
 <ul>
-    <li>Communication process structured with narration that continues
+    <li>A communication process structured with narration that continues
 through many pages.</li>
     <li>A narration structure sometimes resembling a fugue or
 improvisation.</li>
@@ -203,7 +204,9 @@
 different US software patents that seemed to cover it.  That is to
 say, each of these 283 different patents forbids some computational
 process found somewhere in the thousands of pages of source code of
-Linux.  And Linux was less than one percent of the GNU/Linux system.</p>
+Linux.  At the time, Linux was around one percent of the whole
+GNU/Linux system.  How many patents might there be that a distributor
+of the whole system could be sued under?</p>
 
 <p>
 The way to prevent software patents from bollixing software
@@ -243,7 +246,7 @@
 </p>
 
 <p>
-Copyright &copy; 2005, 2007, 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+Copyright &copy; 2005, 2007, 2008 Richard Stallman
 </p>
 <p>Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article are
 permitted worldwide, without royalty, in any medium, provided this
@@ -253,7 +256,7 @@
 <p>
 Updated:
 <!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2009/07/11 12:02:11 $
+$Date: 2009/12/15 15:44:40 $
 <!-- timestamp end -->
 </p>
 </div>