There is understandable confusion about copyright and patents, which is not surprising because different jurisdictions have different requirement. In view of some other recent threads, I've made some notes on copyright and patents, mainly from a UK perspective. Note that I'm not a lawyer so these comments are my own understanding of the situation and come without any warranty.COPYRIGHTCopyright exist as soon as something that can be protected is created and recorded in some way, eg on paper, on film, via sound recording, as an electronic record on the internet, etc. In the UK, and most jurisdictions, there are no official registers for copyright. So, there is no need to take any action.It's not legally necessary in the UK to mark copyright work with the copyright symbol © followed by a name and date, but it's a good idea.Copyright protects:* original literary works, such as novels, instruction manuals, computer programs, lyrics for songs, articles in newspapers, some types of databases * original dramatic works* original musical works* original artistic works* published editions of works* sound recordings* films, including videos* broadcasts.These are protected by copyright, regardless of the medium in which they exist and this includes the internet. Copyright does not protect ideas. It protects the way the idea is expressed, but does not protect the idea itself. Patents protect ideas.PATENTSPatents have to be applied for and granted. This costs money. Estimates are

Hi mgh,If you posted this triggered by "the other thread" :-) :If so:I think you are right here, as far as I know.But (if there even WAS a misunderstanding about that): I wasn't claiming that the "idea" was stolen, but the actual "code".Now the first would have been a "patent", the second "copyright".Fortunately I have never (incuding myself) seen a developer here claim that an "idea", "algoritm" or alike were stolen; only "code".Because if THAT was the case, we designers could all pack our bags and go home :-)But thanks for the post anyway.Best regards, Rob

RobYou are right about the trigger.I was trying to explain the difference between copyright and patents.Copyright automatically exists from the moment something is recorded, and I suspect is the best protection for freeware developers, although, sadly, there can be no real protection against the unscrupulous and dishonest.Patents requires an formal application, expenditure of money with no guarantee of success, can be challenged, and are geographically limited. This makes me doubt that many FS payware developers go down that route whatever they may claim.

These days it all comes down to Intellectual Property and the site I have directed clients to is http://www.intellectual-property.gov.uk/

In these types of cases, this is all irrelevant. There is a difference between what is legal and what is "moral". If a company violates the terms requested by a freeware designer, I will not support that company...Period. I don't care if technically they are not breaking any laws.Matt

My intention was to clarify the different types of protection available to an author of software.There is no doubt in my mind that unauthorised publication of someone else's software is a breach of copyright.