Anyone want to set forth a little tutorial on available forms of IP protection for formats? --- meaning IP protection against the use of a format itself (like PDF, JPEG, Word.doc, TeX syntax), as contrasted to IP protections for software that may create or read the formats.
Can a format itself be directly protected -- can the owner or developer of a format forbid anyone else to use that format, even if this user takes an openly available specification of the format, or reverse engineers it, and writes completely new software to generate or read files written in that format?
Or can the original owner or developer only protect the _name_ of the format? -- meaning that others can't put out slightly modified versions of the format, and call them by the same name?
Or . . . ???
[This query arises only from general curiosity and intellectual interest -- no specific case or situation in mind.]
AES <sieg...@stanford.edu> wrote: > Anyone want to set forth a little tutorial on available forms of IP > protection for formats? --- meaning IP protection against the use of a > format itself (like PDF, JPEG, Word.doc, TeX syntax), as contrasted to > IP protections for software that may create or read the formats.
> Can a format itself be directly protected -- can the owner or developer > of a format forbid anyone else to use that format, even if this user > takes an openly available specification of the format, or reverse > engineers it, and writes completely new software to generate or read > files written in that format?
> Or can the original owner or developer only protect the _name_ of the > format? -- meaning that others can't put out slightly modified versions > of the format, and call them by the same name?
> Or . . . ???
> [This query arises only from general curiosity and intellectual interest > -- no specific case or situation in mind.]
IANAL, but I think the only real way to protect formats all by themselves is as a trade secret. But this doesn't protect against reverse engineering.
In practice, what is often done is to patent the methods used to create and/or read the format. This should only be valid if the methods are not obvious from the description of the format. An example of this is the original LZ compression format -- it's not just a format, it's the result of a compression algorithm, and this algorithm was patented.
-- Barry Margolin, bar...@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***
> In article <siegman-5E8C44.08373523042...@nntp.stanford.edu>,
> AES <sieg...@stanford.edu> wrote: > > Anyone want to set forth a little tutorial on available forms of IP > > protection for formats? --- meaning IP protection against the use of a > > format itself (like PDF, JPEG, Word.doc, TeX syntax), as contrasted to > > IP protections for software that may create or read the formats.
> > Can a format itself be directly protected -- can the owner or developer > > of a format forbid anyone else to use that format, even if this user > > takes an openly available specification of the format, or reverse > > engineers it, and writes completely new software to generate or read > > files written in that format?
> > Or can the original owner or developer only protect the _name_ of the > > format? -- meaning that others can't put out slightly modified versions > > of the format, and call them by the same name?
> > Or . . . ???
> > [This query arises only from general curiosity and intellectual interest > > -- no specific case or situation in mind.]
> IANAL, but I think the only real way to protect formats all by > themselves is as a trade secret. But this doesn't protect against > reverse engineering.
> In practice, what is often done is to patent the methods used to create > and/or read the format. This should only be valid if the methods are > not obvious from the description of the format. An example of this is > the original LZ compression format -- it's not just a format, it's the > result of a compression algorithm, and this algorithm was patented.
> -- > Barry Margolin, bar...@alum.mit.edu > Arlington, MA > *** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***- Hide quoted text -
In article <6af66106-c6c5-4581-bf91-7094afc80...@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
Regis <quela...@netscape.net> wrote: > On Apr 24, 4:00 am, Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > > In article <siegman-5E8C44.08373523042...@nntp.stanford.edu>, > >... > For the PCT > http://www.wipo.int/pct/en/texts/pdf/ispe.pdf > Read 5.26-5.27 about product by process claims.
