Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ames.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!zehntel!dual!ames!barry
From: barry@ames.UUCP (Ken Barry)
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Protection of ideas?
Message-ID: <482@ames.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 18-Aug-84 20:54:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: ames.482
Posted: Sat Aug 18 20:54:47 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 20-Aug-84 01:34:20 EDT
Organization: NASA-Ames Research Center, Mtn. View, CA
Lines: 37

[*************=8>:)         (snort)]

> Lauren Weinstein:

> idea, property, and personal rights are protected by law
> in any case.  The idea rights of the programming on cable and radio
> transmission systems are certainly worth the same protections as
> we would give any more "physical" items.  It is silly to say
> that something cannot be protected simply because "you can't touch it."

	Not to pick on Lauren, but I sometimes see some confusion in
this discussion about the protection of "ideas" under the law. 
	Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. My understanding, however, is
that the law does *not* protect ideas, but only specific implementations
or expressions of ideas. Nor is this an oversight; the exclusion of ideas
is intentional. The only way to protect an idea is to keep it a secret.
	For example, if I were to invent a time machine, I could get
a patent on the device I created, and have legal protection against others
copying (or nearly copying) my device without my permission. I could
not, however, get a patent on the *idea* of time travel, nor exclusive
rights to the physical principles by which my machine operated. Others
would have a perfect right to build and use time machines, as long as
they used a method not protected by my patent.
	And similarly for copyright: Larry Niven can copyright RINGWORLD,
but could not copyright the *idea* of a ring-shaped world even if he'd
originated it.
	The examples were chosen for clarity. There are cases (programming
algorithms come to mind) where the distinction between 'idea' and 'expression-
of-idea' is quite unclear. But I believe my statement of the legal principle
is correct. Corrections and/or amplifications from those more knowledgeable
than myself are welcomed.

-  From the Crow's Nest  -                      Kenn Barry
                                                NASA-Ames Research Center
                                                Moffett Field, CA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Electric Avenue:              {dual,hao,menlo70,hplabs}!ames!barry