[plug] Intellectual Property

[Mike from West Australia]

At 09:13 PM 5/8/2000 +0800, you wrote:
>Mike from West Australia wrote:
>> The same goes for architects, you own the plan and (when you pay for
>> it) the house built from that plan - but you don't automatically own
>> the right to copy that plan or make profit from its duplication or
>> build another house from that plan without gaining the right to from
>> the architect.
>
>With the "architect" representing the programmer, and "homeowner" his
>employer?

In theory yes but, as others have observed and I tend to agree the case of
contract programmers has its own complications. Such as:-
a.	Employement contract, implied or explicity stated
b.	Who is the author, the employee or the employer
c.	Recognition/implied license/use of prior art etc

and many other complications...

>> Most 'clever' programming techniques many would want to claim as their IP
>> have been done before with many many variations on a theme and most of the
>> bases if not all are taught at uni etc.
>
>And recently, explicitly copyrighted by someone, Amazon, Microsoft or
>whoever... )-:

mmm Though I doubt its ever been properly challenged and there's a heap of
inherent techniques which borrow from IP long gone, so overall I wouldn't
worry...

Rgds

Mike