On 11/10/2014 8:31 AM, Lostgallifreyan wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote in news:m3qe5l$n1r$2@dont-
email.me:

Well, unless your code contains a "new and innovative idea", it's not
patentable, anyway. You can copyright the code (it's automatically
copyrighted, anyway - but you have to register that copyright in the
U.S. to have any *real* protection), but not necessarily patent it.


I've considered copyright, and that's the only realistic legal and public
protection, I think.

As to innovative ideas, I have several things never seen in any commercial
'FM' (more accurately, phase modulation) synthesiser. One of which produces
much more natural sound, the 'grit' in a tonewheel organ simulation, the
flare in brass sounds, and many other applications, also a totally new way to
configure the instrument, many more routings between operators than Yamaha
allowed, and a few more besides! The trouble is NOT that theyare 'new'. It is
surely that others like me have likely done similar, and all been beaten into
oblivion.


If they have, it would not pass the "new and innovative" test.

The problem is not a lack or real innovation, it is that no-one can establish
it! I bet there are tens, if not hundreds of people out there with similar
advances, all equally thwarted, waiting in vain for a way out.


I would suspect so. And the cost of patenting something is a huge
detriment, unless you are either rich (and don't need the money) or can
convince someone that your idea is marketable (and get a penny per
thousand dollars for your idea).

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================