New answers tagged

6

Of course windmills/turbines in general are not new and one would not need a license or permission to make and sell a "generic" wind turbine. But there are new types of wind mills invented and patented all the time. Examples are US7821148B2 Wind turbine and US8441138B2 Wind turbine. Patents are complicated and an inventor of a new type of windmill ...


6

There can be no patent on the idea of wind wheels, as they are medieval "prior art". Likewise, many generator patents are no longer applicable, the first were invented back in 1831 by Faraday. Recombining a windwheel with a dynamo is almost as old - so the idea and basic setup of even the worst efficient wind turbines is not patentable: You can not ...


0

The legal worst-case scenario is that he will be found liable for copyright infringement. This can mean compensation for actual damages which is the money the copyright owner lost from the infringement (sale cost), and could include infringer's profits, except that the copyright owner of mass-market software is usually not entitled to a share of the profits ...


1

First of all, it is possible that the software is in fact legal. Copies of older versions bought in bulk for resale but never sold are sometimes sold at large discounts because no one will buy them at more normal prices. And there are other scenarios (such as OEM licenses) under which these might be legal. In that case, there is no problem for anyone. If ...


2

Note: As a jurisdiction is not specified, this answer assumes United States law throughout. OP's profile says they are in California, so this is hopefully correct. Copyright law You cannot transfer a copyright in an idea, because ideas are expressly excluded from copyright protection in 17 USC 102(b). So you can't have such a copyright in the first place. By ...


0

A company is not required to disclose its IP (copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets) to a director or a shareholder, nor to authorize such a person to use any of those, or any patents (patents of course must be publicly disclosed to everyone). In some cases a director might be unable to properly perform his or her function without some knowledge of company ...


1

A person who contributed code to a github-based project, or indeed to any similar informal project, can freely reuse, modify or share that code, unless the person had promised not to in a contract or binding agreement. Many projects on Github are under open source licenses, where such agreements are not used. The question seems to indicate that no such ...


0

There is arguably nothing creative about a chess party. Every player picks the move that they believe is best, not one that looks good, or is funny etc., and that is repeated 60 or 80 times. Of course this is difficult to do, but like running 100 metres in 9.9 seconds, it is a great achievement, but not creative. Problem chess would be a different matter, ...


3

This answer reflects US law; I don't know German law. To be more precise, what parts of the chess game are copyrighted? The parts which are not copyrighted are the facts of the individual games. These include the moves, the players involved, the venue, the clock times, draw offers, etc. Basically, anything found on the scoresheet. The parts which are ...


-2

I'd imagine it is capable of being copyrighted, but not necessarily. It depends on jurisdiction, and whether it has been expressly copyrighted or not. Be aware that in some jurisdictions, copyright can be implied meaning that something can be copyright even if it isn't expressly copyright.


0

The formalistic answer to your question is that no, ideas aren't protected because copyright law has something called the "idea-expression dichotomy." See Baker v. Selden. Ideas aren't protected by copyright, expression of those ideas is. Id. But, as with almost everything in law, it's really not that simple. If you start reading copyright cases ...


1

Under U.S. law, absent some express contractual obligation of Company A with Company B, or a relevant court decree, or disclosure obligation arising in the context of a lawsuit brought by Company B against Company A, there is no general affirmative duty to pro-actively disclose the use of Company B's intellectual property on the part of Company A. It will ...


3

A (legal) derivative work has its own independent copyright I'll use the same example Wikipedia does, L.H.O.O.Q.: This is a derivate work of da Vinci's Mona Lisa. It's a legal work because the Mona Lisa was well and truly public domain partly because da Vinci had been dead 401 years but mostly because he died 191 years before the first copyright law was ...


2

You are absolutely allowed to discuss or describe or criticizes software (or books or other copyrighted or trademarked things) without any permission from the copyright holder or trademark holder. This includes teaching people how to use those things. You may not, however, copy protected software without permission. For example you could not include a CD ...


3

The primary legal division is that you can lawfully talk about intellectual property (such talking becomes your intellectual property), and you can only redistribute intellectual property with the permission of the owner. (A contractual non-disclosure agreement is irrelevant, because you aren't an Apple employee obligae=ted to not talk about the new system ...


1

The rights of a landowner, in general, include the right to control access to his land (but these rights are subject to, among other things, the CROW Act you refer to). The landowner may consent to you coming on to his land. That consent may be subject to conditions (for example, don't take photographs, or don't take photographs to be used commercially). You ...


3

Yes, you may The layout of the board and its appearance are not protected by copyright, because they are not expressions or any other type of copyrightable content. Even if they were (say if some protested art was displayed on the board) you are displaying this for instructional purposes, and not harming any market for the board, so fair use is likely to ...


1

... any countries' copyright laws ... Here in Germany, we don't have a "Copyright" but an "Urheberrecht". One of the main differences is that the "Urheberrecht" does not define the copyright as some kind of (negotiable) property which is owned by some person or company; instead, it defines that as long as the person who created ...


2

A user's rights to intellectual property can be bargained away to various extents. In general, a user either has a right to IP because they created the IP, or because they acquired a right via a license and in exchange for consideration (e.g. a license to use MS Word, in exchange for money). Your app grants permission to use your IP (in exchange for ...


3

That a computer language is proprietary does not mean that all code written in that language is copyrighted by the holder of copyright on the language. Anyone may write, and publish, code in a particular language without permission from the language designers, or anyone else, provided that the code is original and is not a close paraphrase of code written by ...


2

Yes, everybody can write licenses. No, not everybody should. Ask a lawyer that is a specialist in this or use an already established license. Using this software you agree that any work and intellectual property based on or created with this software will be under the [INSERT_NAME_LICENSE] license, even after any and all code from this software is removed ...


7

Can anybody create their own license? That is to say, can I for example create my own license under which I can license software? Yep. It's just a contract granting rights to use a copyrighted work. You can write your own contracts, so you can write your own software license. It's just often recommended that you don't, because common licenses are more ...


Top 50 recent answers are included