rights.

Page 3/5
1 | 2 | | 4 | 5

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (109)

anonymous's picture

10-07-2004, 17:57

{moderated by Bart}

Guyver, The "moderator alert" was enough.

By Bart

Paragon (1423)

Bart's picture

10-07-2004, 18:18

Thanks for all the moderator alerts, guys! Wink

Please keep this discussion on topic from now on. Thanks!!!

By anonymous

incognito ergo sum (109)

anonymous's picture

10-07-2004, 18:40

please guys, this forum topic is for discussion about copyrights/patents of MSX. Overall what work can be done full-legally.

I'm wondered of what exactly patents got ASCII about MSX, if a FPGA MSX can be done legally (without the ROMS ofcourse).
Well.. MSX Association got all MSX rights previously belonging to ASCII, so I suppose that includes their patents (if any).

As said, MSX Association does not make a problem of MSX compatible device or MSX hardware implementations.

As you should know, ESE Artists Factory is working on a FPGA implementation of MSX, which Sunrise has demonstrated on MSX fairs throughtout europe.

Futhermore, both in Spain (Leonardo Padial) and Brazil (Ademir Carchano) there are projects undergoing that aim to develop new MSX compatible hardware.

MSX Association has not protested against those projects, so you can be reasonably sure they will not protest about another project you might want to start.

And ofcourse, permission is the best legal defense, I'd say Smile

Or how we can to know what kind of pattents got ASCII.
Consulting the (japanese) patent office would be a good starting point.

By flyguille

Prophet (3029)

flyguille's picture

10-07-2004, 18:53

nobody of the MSX asociation post or visit on MRC?

and can write some sentences here about the topic? like "what is the MSX asociation policies about the topic?

By Grauw

Ascended (8454)

Grauw's picture

11-07-2004, 16:54

Sonic_aka_T wrote:
Don't you mean copyright Guyver?
and a little earlier:
Actually, that's covered by patent law entirely.
As far as I understand in the previous post you were talking about patents. Guyver responded on that mentioning the (c) ASCII etc. Those are of course two different things, copyrights are everywhere, patents however are not and software is (as of yet, in the EU - or the Netherlands at least) not even patentable. So the response doesn't seem to cover the actual original message.

However, Sonic, I don't see you mentioning 'patent' anywhere in the later post either. So I'm not entirely sure if you made this distinction yourself as well. In other words, to me it seems that both of you are confusing things.

Fortunately, MTH puts it all in perspective Smile. I basically agree with his conclusion, although I have to say that the legality is based on the current common assumptions. It is however indeed still a fairly grey area with no law (well, ok, DMCA a bit, but I don't live in the US) and little jurisprudence for it.

~Grauw

By [D-Tail]

Ascended (8232)

[D-Tail]'s picture

11-07-2004, 23:10

ASCII registered the MSX trademark in the early 80's. MSX Association reportedly had the registration moved to their name, although the last time I checked the online trademark database it was still registered to ASCII (maybe slow bureaucracy?).mth, could you drop us a link to that online trademark database? At least I am interested in these matters Wink

By IC

Hero (557)

IC's picture

11-07-2004, 23:30

I just found this one one the net: http://www.uspto.gov/

By Sonic_aka_T

Enlighted (4130)

Sonic_aka_T's picture

12-07-2004, 00:34

Sonic_aka_T wrote:
'Don't you mean copyright Guyver?'
and a little earlier:
'Actually, that's covered by patent law entirely.'

The first was attempted sarcasm concerning Guyver's earlier copyright remark. Like you noticed, I had already indicated that these issues are covered by patent, and not copyright.

As far as I understand in the previous post you were talking about patents. Guyver responded on that mentioning the (c) ASCII etc. Those are of course two different things, copyrights are everywhere, patents however are not and software is (as of yet, in the EU - or the Netherlands at least) not even patentable. So the response doesn't seem to cover the actual original message.
Well, I think fly was originally talking about hardware, not software. Hardware can ofcourse be patented (well, not the hardware itself but the unique techniques or methods it employs). I don't think there's too much patented technology in our MSX computer though since I've never seen a patent number on anything. That would pretty much indicate that the technology is up for grabs. What adds to this is that most patents only last from 14 to 17 years which means for MSX that a lot of patents, if they even existed, are due to expire. This extends a little if the patent holder had the common sense to keep their patents pending for as long a possible, but I doubt there's much patented technology in an MSX to begin with.

However, Sonic, I don't see you mentioning 'patent' anywhere in the later post either. So I'm not entirely sure if you made this distinction yourself as well. In other words, to me it seems that both of you are confusing things.
I'm not that confused. My first post pretty much explains it all. The second one was just a little wink to Guyver.

Fortunately, MTH puts it all in perspective Smile. I basically agree with his conclusion, although I have to say that the legality is based on the current common assumptions. It is however indeed still a fairly grey area with no law (well, ok, DMCA a bit, but I don't live in the US) and little jurisprudence for it.
Patent law is actually pretty clear. The only grey area is when something is indeed a patent violation or not. In practice this means that if the patent-owner is a US company it is a violation and if the patent-infringer is a US company it was not a violation. Tongue

By IC

Hero (557)

IC's picture

12-07-2004, 00:48

If I read yer post correctly Sonic_aka_T then you'r quite confused if MSX is patented. And if that's the case: why respond directly with a 'nope' (read the 3rd post in this thread) while you are not 'really' certain.

If I might add, and this is a general tip: when a certain company/ foundation would really make a point of stand (standpunt) then come up with arguments backing it up. I'v seen a complete thread with notihin' but doubts

By Sonic_aka_T

Enlighted (4130)

Sonic_aka_T's picture

12-07-2004, 01:15

If I read yer post correctly Sonic_aka_T then you'r quite confused if MSX is patented. And if that's the case: why respond directly with a 'nope' (read the 3rd post in this thread) while you are not 'really' certain.
You're reading the posts the wrong way. Read the thread, not posts...

fly asked if it is illegal to make an MSX compatible machine. I answered no. Why? Well, you really don't need a patent lawyer for that. If IBM computers could be cloned I hope we all agree that MSX computers can be too. Is this a legally backed statement that will hold water in a court? No, by no means. Is it true though? Yes, probably. (or just plain yes, whichever you prefer)

If I might add, and this is a general tip: when a certain company/ foundation would really make a point of stand (standpunt) then come up with arguments backing it up. I'v seen a complete thread with notihin' but doubts
I don't quite understand what you mean by the first part. If you mean by company/foundation someone willing to make MSX hardware, ofcourse you would consult a patent office before you make 300 computers you won't be able to sell. If you mean something else, sorry, please elaborate.

There's no doubts, at least not from my point. Fly asks a question, I answer it. Guyver mentions copyrights. I observe that only patent law has any revelance towards the issue. Do I know for a fact that there's not a single patented computer component in every MSX computer ever made? No I don't. Hell, I don't even know half of the MSX models that are out there. Is it likely that there's technology that was suffieciently unique, innovative and commercially viable to have been patented? I doubt it.

For everything MSX2 and under, any patents will have expired by now. Ofcourse this does not cover everything, but it's the bulk of the 'technology'. Does this cover MSX2+ and the likes? Well, I guess you'd have to check the patent registrar, but if I check on my Turbo-R there's not a single mention of any patent numbers on it.

Would any patents be 'avoidable'? Well, every other computer patent in this world has been, so I guess we can safely assume the same goes for MSX. But, yes, you're right. I really don't know if any of the hundreds of MSX models out there have patented technology in them... I will promise you though, that it is possible to legally make an MSX clone though, which was the question asked in this topic.

Page 3/5
1 | 2 | | 4 | 5