Why would the Philippine government and the Chinese government care about US intellectual property rights when the US itself only recognizes Philippine and East Asian intellectual property rights with barely heard lip service?
Okay - you've got a stalemate. Both sides refuse to work with each other and points to the other side, accusing the other side for all of the problems.
This helps us fix piracy . . . how?
Yeah, I would agree international law is quite messy right now.
In addition, I have to agree with the people who say copying ideas is not violating copyright. Copyright just protects the words on the paper; it doesn't protect the ideas those words represent.
This has lead to some interesting cases of "stealing" that may not be illegal under some laws.
Before I go further - I'm not claiming I agree with this, I'm just describing it.
And before I go even further - I'm not a lawyer. I do not know whether or not it is really legal.
As I understand it, there was (and perhaps still is?) a practice called "clean room design." Basically, it's copying the functionality without actually copying the code.
You have one team take a look at the code and/or how it interacts with the other componenets of the system, and write up some specifications. Then, you turn around and give the specifications to somebody else, and they write their own code to fit the specifications. This means the actual code itself is not copied, even though the new code acts like the old code.
So that pretty much demonstrates what copyright does: It covers the actual code itself, but it does not cover the behavior of the code.
Keep in mind, this "clean room design" approach does not work with patents, as you do not have to do any type of copying in order to violate a patent.
And again, I am not a lawyer. I am not making any claims about the actual legality of this practice. I am also not claiming I agree with the practice.
Ideas are not as rigidly protected as pure copying, as far as I know. While it's certainly despised by a lot of people here, it's not really illegal to "copy" an idea unless it has been covered by a patent.
2. DRM = not bad if implemented correctly. Limit to how many times I load the software sucks but other than that, people are making a bigger issue out of it just to hear themselves bloviate on the subject.
Sure, you can possibly do a decent job at hiding it and making it "user friendy."
But it just doesn't work as intended. All forms of DRM that I know of have been cracked.
There will always be the scurge of software pirates but are losses caused by their actions any greater than the lost customer base, due to DRM software, and wasted DRM R&D investments?
That's the billion dollar question. How much pirating is DRM really preventing? Frankly, it just doesn't sound like it's effective enough to justify the heavy R&D costs of creating it, not to mention how many people get angry about it and how much it puts a system at risk, considering the low level (often kernel level!) they generally run at and how poorly they are designed.