Man Claims Copyright On Mental Math Trick

from the try-calculating-how-likely-you-are-to-enforce-that... dept

Wed, Aug 12th 2009 8:58am — Mike Masnick

There's a wonderful book by Ben Klemens called Math You Can't Use about how the growing encroachment of intellectual property laws on things like basic algorithms and software are locking up math. However, it appears that one guy is trying to take it to an extreme. Pegr alerts us to a story of a guy who claims to have obtained a copyright on a method for multiplying any two numbers in your head, and he's willing to sell you the trick for $33. Of course, there are all sorts of mental multiplication tricks out there (and a quick search of the web will teach you most of them, if you're unfamiliar with them). There aren't many details on the supposed "copyright" on this trick, so it's not clear if he actually registered the copyright or just thinks he has the copyright, but it will be fascinating to see if he stops anyone else from discussing the method, should it actually be new.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: copyright, math

27 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 12 Aug 2009 @ 9:14am

Acceptance
The sad thing is that the article doesn't question or even qualify the claim.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ima Fish (profile), 12 Aug 2009 @ 9:29am

Even if he does have a copyright, it'd be on the specific expression of the trick, not on the underlying trick itself.

Once again, you cannot copyright an idea!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Matt, 12 Aug 2009 @ 9:34am

booklet
Here's a different article I came across about the same story. It doesn't really sound like he is trying to copyright the idea, but the booklet in which he teaches it.

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/health_science/story/1641012.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Aug 2009 @ 9:38am

Re: booklet
exactly. mike linked to what amounts to foxnews' blogspam. the newsobserver article is the original article.

the guy isn't copyrighting the actual method, but a pamphlet that explains how to use the method.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ethorad, 12 Aug 2009 @ 9:39am

copyright registration
When you register a copyright, can people turn up to view/read it? Similar to the way anyone can see the details of a patent.

The copyright in this case is registration number TXu001325432
http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?Search_Arg=txu001325432&Search_Code =REGS&PID=_2EHbLdcH6qgz4N1vsHFezPvsk&SEQ=20090812123358&CNT=25&HIST=1

I'm guessing you can't, as otherwise the copyright office would be breaching copyright, but how can you ensure that you haven't broken someone's copyright if you can't see what it is?

(and on a related note, a thought has occurred to me. What happens if you claim copyright on your patent application in order to try and keep it quiet? Or does submission to the patent process require giving them permission to publish?)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Enrico Suarve, 12 Aug 2009 @ 9:40am

Re: Re: booklet
Cos thats sane right?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Enrico Suarve, 12 Aug 2009 @ 9:43am

Re: copyright registration
I like where your thought process is going...

Someone should file a class action against the USPTO for massive copyright infringement
[ link to this | view in thread ]
dwind, 12 Aug 2009 @ 9:45am

my iphone can do that
as can my mac and even my windows machine once and a while.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Matt (profile), 12 Aug 2009 @ 9:48am

Re: Re: Re: booklet
Well, authors are allowed to copyright books all the time. I generally agree with Mike's views of copyright, but don't really see the problem with this instance when given the details provided in the News Observer story.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Matt, 12 Aug 2009 @ 9:49am

Re: my iphone can do that
Hahaha!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pwdrskir (profile), 12 Aug 2009 @ 9:50am

Mind tricks
He's copy written the printed booklet so it can't be used in textbooks unless he authorizes the method's printing in said textbook. That shouldn’t stop a teacher from teaching said method if that teacher/school purchases the $33 copy of the pamphlet and teaches the idea.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 12 Aug 2009 @ 9:55am

Re: Re: Re: Re: booklet
"It becomes clear when you see Clay's written explanation, and it's that six-page booklet that earned him a copyright. You can't copyright ideas, but you can get the legal rights to the way you explain them, said Anthony Biller, attorney with the Cary firm Coats & Bennett, which specializes in intellectual property law."

This is why lawyers tend to start off as English majors. "The way you explain them" *sounds* a lot more encompassing than "the specific expression of an idea."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
m, 12 Aug 2009 @ 9:59am

Your html is broken. Target for new window is _blank, not _new. With _new all your links open in the same window, named _new.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
pegr, 12 Aug 2009 @ 11:07am

Woohoo!
My first accepted submission!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DJ (profile), 12 Aug 2009 @ 11:30am

Re: Mind tricks
The word is "Copyright", not "copy write", therefore:

"copy written" is a two-word redundancy.

"Copyrighted" is the correct term.

/soapbox
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DJ (profile), 12 Aug 2009 @ 11:33am

Re: Mind tricks
"That shouldn’t stop a teacher from teaching said method if that teacher/school purchases the $33 copy of the pamphlet"

First, he has to prove, to a jury, that said teacher DIDN'T learn the method elswhere, or think of it him/herself.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DJ (profile), 12 Aug 2009 @ 11:34am

Re: Woohoo!
woot! grats
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Aug 2009 @ 11:48am

Re:
But you can patent them!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Aug 2009 @ 12:13pm

This comment is copyrighted.
This comment is copyrighted. Anyone viewing the comment has illegally copied my creative works and is infringing. So there, please pay me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Fernando, 12 Aug 2009 @ 12:57pm

Yeah, another big bad IP shark. Except he's nothing of the sort if you bother to read TFA. He wrote a pamphlet. Under US law, he automatically owns a copyright to that pamphlet. He took the trouble to register the copyright, probably for vanity reasons.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous of Course, 12 Aug 2009 @ 5:32pm

Hmm...
I wonder if he's using the Trachtenberg system,
though I'm not willing to pay $33 to find out.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pseudonym, 12 Aug 2009 @ 7:31pm

Prior art
There's a rumour that the specific method goes back at least as far as the 12th century Indian mathematician Bhāskara II. But I'm not going to pay $33 to find out, either.

In the end, it's hard to say what this guy is claiming. It's not illegal to charge $33 for a pamphlet. It is illegal to enforce a claimed ownership of a 900 year old mental mathematics trick.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pwdrskir (profile), 13 Aug 2009 @ 10:53am

Re: Re: Mind tricks
Point taken...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pwdrskir (profile), 13 Aug 2009 @ 10:57am

Re: Re: Mind tricks
Buying the pamphlet is still a valid option…
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Keifer, 20 Aug 2009 @ 11:28am

Information Asymmetries
The blog does not involve IP law. It is someone who has a method that he is willing to share for payment. He is looking to capitalize on an information asymmetry and nothing more.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jake, 19 Jul 2011 @ 1:42pm

Yeah... just because you multiplied two 4 digit numbers, doesn't mean you can multiply any number using the method. You have to give a proof before you claim that. There are plenty of "public domain" fast multiplication methods (and non-copyrightable I might add) that can do this only within a specific range of numbers. When you travel outside the range, it fails. Unless there is a formal proof, I'm not paying $33.00 for it.

Also, how can you copyright a formula that is "in your head"? U.S. copyright law only applies to writings or works that are "physically rendered" such as software code. You can't copyright something that is floating around in your brain unless you write it down, and if you do write it down I would find it hard to believe that it wouldn't be disseminated through word of mouth (which is not copyrightable because saying something isn't physical).

Also, this came from Faux News. Proceed with caution.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Amar, 3 Jun 2014 @ 5:00am

How can anyone claim copyright on this thing. how can you copyright a formula that is "in your head" . We have to first find out if his maths tricks are newly invented and unique

http://www.vedicmathstricks.com/
[ link to this | view in thread ]