🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4547:May2223:16:3391@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>In article <HANCHE.91May22203428@hufsa.imf.unit.no> hanche@imf.unit.no (Harald Hanche-Olsen) writes:
>> The reason I am asking is this: I had
>> always thought it is ok to "make and use" a patented invention for the
>> purpose of exploring the patent and its applications.
>
>The precise legal phrase is this: ``for the sole purpose of satisfying
>philosophical taste or curiosity, or for instruction and amusement.''
                                   --------------------------------

Does this mean that if I make one for instruction without amusement,
it is illegal?  So if I make a copy of a patented graphical game (which
does not amuse me) to see how it works, then it is illegal, but if I
make a copy of a patented text adventure (which does amuse me) to see
how it works, then it's legal?

This is a serious question.  The reason I ask it is, of course, that
practical use might turn it on its head.  If instruction by itself is
sufficient (that is, if they really meant "for instruction OR amusement"),
then amusement by itself is sufficient.  However, in order to get a
reliable answer, I had to ask the preceding question.
--
Norman Diamond       diamond@tkov50.enet.dec.com
If this were the company's opinion, I wouldn't be allowed to post it.
Permission is granted to feel this signature, but not to look at it.