From f3585ce68db1ef47511a02867a3f4f391968eaaf 2014-03-19 16:35:09 From: Tony Sebro Date: 2014-03-19 16:35:09 Subject: [PATCH] updated analysis. --- diff --git a/gpl-lgpl.tex b/gpl-lgpl.tex index 1603e583b76a880dd5a679ed91622f9af1eaf9ee..ec8afcdf5202d3a3b60e71e1ebc5ec4a42613a0d 100644 --- a/gpl-lgpl.tex +++ b/gpl-lgpl.tex @@ -1413,7 +1413,7 @@ both a ``method of operation'' (using an approach not dissimilar to the First Circuit's analysis in Lotus) and a ``functional requirement for compatability'' (using Sega v. Accolade, 977 F.2d 1510 (9th Cir. 1992) and Sony Computer Ent. v. Connectix, 203 F.3d 596 (9th Cir. 2000) as analogies), -and thus unprotectable subject matter under \S 102(b). +and thus unprotectable subject matter under \S 102(b). Perhaps not surprisingly, there have been few other cases involving a highly detailed software derivative work analysis. Most often, cases involve