Xref: utzoo gnu.misc.discuss:3166 comp.misc:12622 comp.dcom.modems:9843
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!ucbvax!ulysses!ulysses.att.com!smb
From: smb@ulysses.att.com (Steven Bellovin)
Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.misc,comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: hayes lawsuit
Message-ID: <14834@ulysses.att.com>
Date: 20 May 91 14:13:26 GMT
References: <TMB.91May13041549@volterra.ai.mit.edu> <1991May20.080912.11342@wimsey.bc.ca>
Sender: netnews@ulysses.att.com
Distribution: usa
Lines: 10

In article <1991May20.080912.11342@wimsey.bc.ca>, jhenders@wimsey.bc.ca (John Henders) writes:
> 
> 	I'm not quite clear on how you've managed to connect software piracy
> with patent protection here. Patent law doesn't protect published software,
> copyrights do. Anyone skilled enough to extract an algorithm from object code
> would hardly be troubled by copy protection. 

I was reasoning by analogy.  Given that vendors are already scared of
appropriation of their technology, without something like patent protection
-- *where it's appropriate* -- we'll see less and less published.