🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Feb11.164105.16249@news2.cis.umn.edu> charlie@umnstat.stat.umn.edu (Charles Geyer) writes:
>If you don't actually rip off GNU code, if you just use the ideas, the
>algorithms, then you are completely in the clear.  No one is more opposed
>to algorithm patents, or even "algorithm" copyrights when the legal sharks
>get around to asserting such things, than FSF.

So you agree believe there is a fundamental difference between the concept
of an algorithm and the implementation of that algorithm in code?  And that
the former should not be restricted, but the latter should?  And you believe
that when I look and find a nifty little search algorithm that's copyrighted
it's okay for me to convert it to a concept on paper and then convert it
back to C code?  And you'll trust my word that that is exactly what I did
and promise not to send your lawyers after me to make sure?  I'd be happy
to believe that, but I don't think a corporate lawyer would.
-- 
Alfalfa Software, Inc.          |       Poste:  The EMail for Unix
nazgul@alfalfa.com              |       Send Anything... Anywhere
617/497-2922                    |       info@alfalfa.com

I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate
everyone else's.