On 9/8/05, david dailey <david.dailey[_at_]sru.edu> wrote:
>
> Consider HTML to be one instance of XML. I could define another XML
> language in which <HEAD> ~ <ACORN> and <BODY> ~<FLUID> and <A
> href=string1> ~ <XLINK where=string2> and so forth. I can indeed
> exercise originality in the names of the tags I use in my XML. The
> functionality of the markup language could in fact be identical
> between two different XML's.
If the XML language that you choose requires the names to be spelled in the same way as they are specified in the language, then the names are not copyrightable because they merge with the functions that they are supposed to do. Just because there is originality in names does not mean that they escape the Merger Doctrine.
> Hence the set of tag names, the mapping
> of tag names to semantic functions, and perhaps even the list of
> semantic functions fulfilled by my "protocol" could contain
> originality.
Adobe uses the same kind of argument. In the documentation
on PDF specification at
http://partners.adobe.com/public/developer/pdf/index_reference.html,
section 1.6 explains why Adobe claims copyright in the commands
and data structures. However, Adobe does not tell the whole
truth such as the merge of expression and function.
For the sake of argument, assuming that you are correct, then Section 102(b) will become meaningless for anyone can simply create a set of names and claim copyright in the whole protocol. This is similar to some chess players who want to claim copyright in the moves they make during game.
However, given that Adobe has an army of lawyers, there is no way to tell them that they are wrong.
> I think the case of protocols like TCP, IP, and HTTP is
> closely parallel (each is a syntactic wrapper associating tag names
> with semantic actions)-- these three just happen to be open standards
> which have expressly abandoned any claim to copyright.
The protocols for TCP and IP probably are very old that they are probably in the public domain due to the lack of copyright notice before March 1, 1989. However, the protocol for HTTP was after March 1, 1989 and I have not seen any explicit statement that the writers of HTTP dedicate the protocol to the public domain.
Joseph Pietro Riolo
<josephpietrojeungriolo[_at_]gmail.com>
<riolo[_at_]voicenet.com>
Number of days left until 1-1-2019 when all knowledge of 1923 in the land of the U.S.A. will be freed from their copyright owners' prisons: 4,862
Public domain notice: I put all of my expressions in this post in the public domain. Received on Fri Sep 09 2005 - 21:35:45 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:55 GMT