1 Lightbulb watch

Having complained at the hackneyed symbolism of the lightbulb as the graphic embodiment of inventive thought, the IPKat regrets to announce that the cover of his beloved New Scientist magazine for 17 September is displaying no fewer than seven of the cliched signs.

2 Does anyone know?

One of the IPKat's friends has written in to ask whether anyone can claim copyright in a DNA sequence. Both blogmeisters have given this issue some serious thought. The IPKat's hunch is that, in principle,
(i) copyright will vest in any literary work in which skill and effort has been invested and

(ii) the recording in writing or other form of a DNA sequence will therefore be protectable by copyright. However,

(iii) copyright protects only the form of expression and not the content, with the results that

* anyone else can record the same DNA sequence without infringing copyright so long as they don't copy the version that has been written or recorded earlier and

* anyone who finds a different mode of expression for the same DNA sequence will not be infringing the copyright in the original literary description of it.
These are just first thoughts and they are based on his appreciation of the traditional UK-based common law approach to copyright. If anyone has a different answer, or knows of an actual case in which this issue was discussed (and, better still, decided), can he or she please let the IPKat know? Just post your response below or send it to the IPKat here.

An animated primer on DNA here
Make your own DNA here
DNA recipes here
DNA jokes here
BURY THAT BULB - AND FOLLOW THAT DNA SEQUENCE! BURY THAT BULB  -  AND FOLLOW THAT DNA SEQUENCE! Reviewed by Jeremy on Monday, September 19, 2005 Rating: 5

No comments:

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.