From commons-dev-return-30090-qmlist-jakarta-archive-commons-dev=nagoya.apache.org@jakarta.apache.org Tue Jun 03 15:13:36 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 81039 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2003 15:13:35 -0000 Received: from exchange.sun.com (192.18.33.10) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Jun 2003 15:13:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 1304 invoked by uid 97); 3 Jun 2003 15:15:49 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-commons-dev@nagoya.betaversion.org Received: (qmail 1297 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2003 15:15:48 -0000 Received: from daedalus.apache.org (HELO apache.org) (208.185.179.12) by nagoya.betaversion.org with SMTP; 3 Jun 2003 15:15:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 57272 invoked by uid 500); 3 Jun 2003 15:06:06 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 57207 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2003 15:06:04 -0000 Received: from smtp.nascopgh.com (HELO notesmail.nascopgh.com) (208.178.127.107) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 3 Jun 2003 15:06:04 -0000 To: Jakarta Commons Developers List Subject: Re: [math] matters of copyright MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.0 September 26, 2002 Message-ID: From: DavidNeuer@nascopgh.com Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2003 11:05:22 -0400 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on NascoMail/Nationwide Appraisal(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 06/03/2003 11:05:26 AM, Serialize complete at 06/03/2003 11:05:26 AM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 0052F4FE85256D3A_=" X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N --=_alternative 0052F4FE85256D3A_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" --- Phil Steitz wrote: > > The dodgy bit is that someone > else who did the same > derivation and ended up with a similar > implementation (e.g. NR) might > claim > ownership of the algorithm itself. This is why the > limitation expressed > in the > NR copyright statement is important. In the US, at least, one cannont copyright or patent a "bare algorithm." Mathematical formulae and algorithms of a purely mathematical nature are deemed "ideas." This fact alone is of course not enough to prevent somone from taking you to court, where you'd then have to prove that your software really was nothing more than a mathematical algorithm expressed in code. For a mathematical library, it would seem a relatively easy thing to prove. Of course, IANAL. --=_alternative 0052F4FE85256D3A_=--