2008-10-21

IDEA: Simple vs. complex processes

The idea running through my head is that I may, at some point, release software to the public that a company I work for deems as their own property. This brings up the idea regarding copyrighting and/or patenting software, which extends into the idea of copyrighting and/or patenting a simple idea.

Consider the following situations:

- Two people write books about a wizard that comes of age and defeats a wizard seeking a legendary "Philosopher's Stone". One writes a story that is marginally interesting and acquires little notice. The other story is written by J. K. Rowling.

- A coder writes a piece of code that is determined to be very useful. The company he is working for uses this code extensively, and it is a central part of their product. Said coder releases this code to the world in a package that in no way reflects the company product. Said company claims the coder violated a non-disclosure agreement, and is liable for damage in an attempt to thwart a copyright or patent on the software.

- You eat a bowl of cereal by pouring cereal into a bowl, pouring in some milk, then using a spoon to eat it. Then someone patents this process, and demands money in some way to compensate for use of their proprietary process

You see how silly this gets?

The worst part is that it is hard to determine the dividing line between a "commonly reachable" idea, and one that has a unique structure that should be protected. With human language, complexity increases with each word used. With constructs, the "parts" tend to be much larger, and therefore do not constitute a "complex" object until the object becomes quite large.

Food for thought.

No comments: