I think maximathica (or maximatica) name will not impose legal
dificulties according to my experiences. I just searched for how to
apply for a patent protection for a formula and i understand even
there is no world wide patent protection for a product. You have to
apply for each country (or unions of countries) one by one. Also names
are a little bit different. They are registered trade marks. Even
there can be with the same name holding companies in different sectors
of the market like parker guitars and parker pens. I remember the
naming problem of gaim/pidgin but i am not sure they got legal
penalties except changing their names. I think we should choose
whatever sounds good now. I think it will be harder to change it in
the future. As once more, unfortunately, ianal. Best regards. Aap.
On 6/27/09, Sheldon Newhouse <sen1 at math.msu.edu> wrote:
> Hunter Monroe wrote:
>> John,
>>
>> Please let me know if you can share the lisp files for Maxima
>> compatibility
>> with Mathematica.
>>
>> If anyone wants to try out Mockmma please free to check out the
>> sourceforge
>> project and share your experience. Soon I will be posting a few tweaks to
>> wxMaxima that will let you see the Mathematica-style command line.
>>
>> Would "Maximatica" be a better name than "Mockmma"?
>>
>> Hunter
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: John Lapeyre [mailto:pdl at johnlapeyre.com]
>> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 3:02 PM
>> To: Hunter Monroe; maxima at math.utexas.edu
>> Subject: Re: Mockmma
>>
>>
>>> Would you have any objection to me including your Mathematica
>>> compatibility tools for maxima in a sourceforge project? This project
>>> would develop a capability to translate Mathematica files into .mac
>>> files and provide a Mathematica-style command line. This could also
>>> build on Mockmma and work by Andrei Siver which has been discussed on
>>> the maxima mailing list. A modest first objective might be to handle
>>> the Combinatorica package created by Pemmaraju and Skiena (who hold
>>>
>> copyright).
>>
>> Yes, you are certainly welcome to use it. I suddenly got an opportunity
>> for
>> a new, more demanding, job and have not touched the project for some time.
>>
>> I think I only posted the perl version. In the meantime I put a lot of
>> work
>> into modifiying Richards' parser (mostly because I was learning lisp) to
>> replace this perl, because it was so slow. I also began to recode many
>> compatibility functions in lisp, because I had a difficult time getting
>> the
>> maxima language to behave like I wanted it to. My proof of concept goal
>> was
>> to take a real-world collection of routines and get the translator and
>> compatibility functions to such a state that they could translate this
>> particular collection. I actually made a good bit of progress to that end.
>> However, as Richard pointed out, some of the most interesting and powerful
>> features of Mma are very difficult or impossible to duplicate, so such a
>> project has this large inherent limitation. But, I imagine there is a good
>> bit of application code, like the example that I was working on, that does
>> not used these interesting features.
>>
>> I can send some of these other things, if you are interested.
>>
>> thanks,
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Maxima mailing list
>> Maxima at math.utexas.edu
>> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
>> .
>>
>>
> Just a word of caution.
> So far maxima is not threatening to other CAS systems and can function
> just fine. I would be somewhat worried about lawsuits if names and
> codes are very close to commercial CAS systems. This is especially true
> in the US where the people who evaluate the validity of this or that
> software don't have much expertise, and those with sufficient funds can
> usually intimidate others.
> For instance, the fairly trivial definitions used in Interval
> arithmetic have been patented (in a completely unfair way). This has
> caused more than a few implementers using Interval Analysis to keep
> their software from being consipicuously made available.
>
> A discussion related to these kinds of 'porting' issues took place on
> this list some time ago in regard to ideas of porting algorithms in the
> "Numerical Recipes" books to maxima--even though many of those
> algorithms were not original to Numerical Recipes. They were simply
> encoded in various high level languages and published in the Numerical
> Recipes books.
>
> Why not keep the Mockmma name for awhile to see how it goes?
>
> -sen
> _______________________________________________
> Maxima mailing list
> Maxima at math.utexas.edu
> http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima
>
--
Sent from my mobile device