RE: [dvd-discuss] Gedanken Experiment -Unix and Norton

[microlenz(at)earthlink.net]

On 9 Jul 2003 at 13:28, Richard Hartman wrote:

Subject:        	RE: [dvd-discuss] Gedanken Experiment -Unix and Norton
Date sent:      	Wed, 9 Jul 2003 13:28:03 -0700
From:           	"Richard Hartman" <hartman@onetouch.com>
To:             	<dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu>
Send reply to:  	dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu

> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Zulauf [mailto:johnzu@ia.nsc.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 8:43 AM
> > To: dvd-discuss@eon.law.harvard.edu
> > Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Gedanken Experiment -Unix and Norton
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > microlenz@earthlink.net wrote:
> > 
> > This one piece out of order...
> > 
> > > ... the kind of editing that would be
> > > necessary to transform database to a copyrightable work 
> > would also negate the
> > > utility of a database and 
> > 
> > If you define database narrowly to only mean a complete 
> > transcription of
> > offline records into online form, I agree.  I think the term is
> > broader.  Back to the "Norton" example, Norton (check their 
> > website) has
> > decided (editorially) that "Spyware" like Gator et. al. is 
> > not "a virus"
> > and therefore won't include it in it's virus signature database, nor
> > remove it (grumble, complain).  While the virus definition file *is* a
> > database, it reflects a set of conscious editorial decisions on what
> > does and does not constitute a virus.
> 
> Moreover, the issue of _how_ to describe the virus signature
> also involves selection.  The 5th and 8th bytes?  The 12th
> and 57th?  The combination resulting by adding the 38th byte
> to 57 and dividing by 2?  Each "fact" in their database is 
> a result of analysis and choice on the part of their
> virus researchers.

That's called an algorithm....not copyrightable....I haven't seen the more 
recent case but at one time the Supremes ruled that an algorithm seem to be a 
fact of nature and not even patentable.


> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> -Richard M. Hartman
> hartman@onetouch.com
> 
> 186,000 mi/sec: not just a good idea, it's the LAW!