Den Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:01:05 -0500 skrev George Neuner:
> On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 06:34:53 -0800 (PST), Ingo Menger
> <quetzalcotl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>>On 11 Feb., 13:00, Xah Lee <x...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>> Mark Tarver <dr.mtar...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>
>>> «A lot of those [mathematica's list manipulation] functions have been
>>> around in CL for years implemented by CL programmers in applications
>>> or as part of the language standard.»
>>>
>>> You speak too quick Mark.
>>>
>>> From what i know of emacs lisp, and scheme literature (reading the
>>> sicp book and r4rs a decade ago), and from the discussions i see from
>>> Common Lispers here, CL has nothing like the complete set of
>>> Mathematica's list manipulating functions.
>>
>>Since when is it forbidden to implement some algorithms, assuming nobody
>>has a patent on them?
>>For this, we don't even have to discuss the utterly absurd notion of a
>>patent on algorithms. The only question is, whether the "complete set of
>>Mathematica's list manipulating functions in any language of the world"
>>is patented or not.
>
> The algorithms may be PD, but Wolfram may have a copyright on the API
> which you _might_ be infringing by implementing it elsewhere. "Look and
> feel" copyrights are a PITA because you can never predict how a judge
> will perceive similarities.
Are you sure you can copyright APIs at all? IANAL and IANEAUC[1], but I
seem to recall that there were precendents at least in the US copyright
law that made .h files and their kin NOT copyrighteable.
Cheers,
Maciej
[1] I Am Not Even A US Citizen
|
