Slashdot Mirror
Patent Troll Ordered To Pay For the Costs of Fighting a Bad Patent
We mentioned last year that FindTheBest CEO Kevin O'Connor had taken an unusual step, when confronted with a demand by patent troll company Lumen View that the startup pay $50,000 for what struck O'Connor as a frivolous patent: He not only refused, but pledged to spend a million bucks, if necessary, to fight Lumen View in court. Now, as Ars Technica reports, O'Connor has succeeded on a grand scale. Before trouncing Lumen View in court, Ars reports, "FindTheBest had spent about $200,000 on its legal fight—not to mention the productivity lost in hundreds of work hours spent by top executives on the lawsuit, and three all-company meetings.
Now the judge overseeing the case has ruled (PDF) that it's Lumen View, not FindTheBest, that should have to pay those expenses. In a first-of-its-kind implementation of new fee-shifting rules mandated by the Supreme Court, US District Judge Denise Cote found that the Lumen View lawsuit was a 'prototypical exceptional case.'"
http://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=14/05/23/1347205
"Unlike the other 36 codefendants, Newegg chose to go further and recover its legal fees, an action that most companies choose not to pursue because prevailing defendants were, until recently, required to demonstrate that a plaintiff acted in bad faith."
The Patent troll will probably just declare bankruptcy and reform under a new name, all in the same day.
Not even looking at how it is structured I'd blindly wager that they are held by no fewer than two shell companies. So the problem is that the people pulling the strings never suffer any real repercussions.
To be fair, it is how our legal system was crafted. The US has a strong streak of 'handle your own problem, power to control your own fate' to it, and the civil suit system was built to support that. There are lots of crimes which in other countries would be prosecuted by one agency or another (for better or worse) but in the US the only redress one has is a civil suit. Even in situations where there are criminal laws on the books, the complaints about the police not doing anything even when supplied with all the evidence they need are significant. Actually convincing a prosecutor to go forward with your case can be an exercise in frustration.
The problem is also that the USPO granted the patent in the first place :/
To be fair, it is how our legal system was crafted. The US has a strong streak of 'handle your own problem, power to control your own fate' to it,
But US law has a strong streak of "you may not handle your own problem, we will tell you what your fate is" to it. That's why, for example, it's harder to start a small business here than in most of the world. Where I live, it costs more in permits than materials to build a two-bedroom house.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
'prototypical exceptional case'
Well which one is it? Prototypical? Or exceptional?
re I live, it costs more in permits than materials to build a two-bedroom house.
Bullshit.
Even in the most expensive parts of the country, you could barely manage to build an uninhabitable, unfinished shell of a house for the price of a building permit.
There are some places in Canada were the permits cost are huge.. Think about a construction permit fee based on the lot size (multiple $$$ per square feet) where the minimum lot size is required to be at least something close to an hectare...
Ah, that old case. It should be noted that there were actually hundreds of injury cases associated with their coffee. They had really bumped up the temperature to unsafe levels and were fully aware that that the standard accidents people had with beverages were resulting in significant burns compared to normal serving levels. The government should have intervened long before that, but they did not because civil suits were the 'solution'.
The problem was not that it was 'hot', but that they were serving it much hotter then would be typical since that was cheaper then using cups with marginally more insulation.
(Like a bad movie) This time it's personal!
I had a similar thought. Yeah permits and inspection costs are non-trivial, but they are no where near the material or labor costs unless you are stripping an old house for parts (i.e. free materials) and using near-slave immigrant labor. Though at that point the bribes needed would probably be greater then the permit costs too.
and the civil suit system was built to support that.
Civil suits are enforced by the government. That's not an example of handling one's own problems at all.
Before you blow your own trumpet too much consider the very bad US example of moving copyright from civil to criminal law which has spread like a cancer around the world. It would be very nice if it went back to Hollywood lawyers suing people instead of SWAT teams through people's windows for copyright violations.
My favourite sentence from the summary in the first link:
The patent troll's attorney also made the claim that calling someone a 'patent troll' was actually a 'hate crime' under 'Ninth Circuit precedent' and threatened to file criminal charges — unless they settled the civil case immediately, apologized, and gave financial compensation to the troll.
and what is the latest news in the prenda soap series ? or has that all quietly been dealt with and they forgot to tell anybody,not heard a whisper in months...
Oh good! So now if some Chinese copycat company with no morals rips off my company's technology and I sue them then they spend 10 million on lawyers and beat my small company, I have to pay that bill for them. Fantastic!
Even in the most expensive parts of the country, you could barely manage to build an uninhabitable, unfinished shell of a house for the price of a building permit.
It's over $30,000 in permits to build a small two bedroom house (say, 1000 square feet) in Lake County, CA, counting the water connection fee and other bullshit. You can buy a kit home for $45/ft^2 or less. A seasoned contractor who purchases materials at the right time of year can absolutely get the materials for less. It'll be a little shit-shack of a house like virtually all of them are, made out of chipboard and sheetrock, but that's what at least nine in ten of the houses being built today are like anyway so let's not be discriminatory. And I've got to add that this is one of the cheapest parts of the state, at least, that nominally still has water. Oh, did I mention that people on municipal water are being subjected to restriction? No new wells are being permitted, so you can only build where there is municipal water, which is mostly really bad here?
Sometimes, I hope I live a long time. Sometimes, I think human lifespans are too damned long. The crusty old fucks holding up progress in this town really get my goat.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The coffee was not at an above normal temperature, in fact the temperature is lower then the temperature recommended by various coffee drinking group.
The way the low temperature got in was the lawyer sueing went around to places that were selling less amounts of coffee and recorded the temperatures of those places.
McDonalds stilll tells its franchises to sell at the temperature of the lawsuit and if you purchase from any major coffe chain that is the temperature range you will mostly likely get.
Coffee hot enough to give 3rd degree burns to the genitals will probably get a lawsuit anywhere. That case gets trotted out as a negative example every time, but if you take the time to read up on it, it's the opposite.
It's over $30,000 in permits to build a small two bedroom house (say, 1000 square feet) in Lake County, CA, counting the water connection fee and other bullshit.
So, not just the price of the building permit, then?
The purpose of development charges is to defray (some of) the costs to local government that they would otherwise incur for doing things like connecting your new home to the water, sewer, electrical, and any other utilities; construction of roads and streetlights; construction and purchase of additional emergency services equipment (fire trucks and fire houses, etc.); construction or enlargement of water reservoirs, sewage treatment plants, and electrical substations....
In other words, there's a heck of a lot of new infrastructure capital costs associated with new expansion of a community--costs that wouldn't be incurred without the new construction. (The rest of your comment notes how precious a commodity water is, and how difficult it is to secure access to more of it.) Instead of loading those costs on to people already living in town, the municipalities put the costs on the developers, who in turn pass them on to the new home buyers.
If you were to instead demolish an existing home and replace it with a new one of similar size, the building permit costs would be far less than $30,000, since the home would already have water, sewer, roads, electrical service....
~Idarubicin
Your first comparison of 42000 to 30000 does not prove your point, and your using of a seasoned contractor twists the argument. A seasoned contractor gets his materials from bulk, not typically time of year. Also part of building costs are the appliances, such as stove, which are considered in most places as part of the house.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
Drink the fox FUD much? You really have no clue do you?
Normal coffee temp is not 190 degrees. Try spilling some water that was just boiling on yourself, now that is what happened in this case.
Quite.
The lady's labia melted to her thigh.
It was not a frivolous law suit.
Eliminate "limited liability" for corporations and expect business owners to buy liability insurance instead. There's no limit to the damage they impose on the rest of society, so there should be no limits to our restitution. Take their mansions, their sports cars, and send their kids to public school.
coffee and tea is made with near boiling water so of course it is hot, so what now they have to wait for the fresh coffee to become lukewarm before they serve it?
because some people think it is McDonalds fault they are clumsy
Oh, did I mention that people on municipal water are being subjected to restriction? No new wells are being permitted, so you can only build where there is municipal water, which is mostly really bad here?
Yeah, what could be the reason for that? A years-long drought perhaps?
Unless you want to personally finance the massive cost of new aqueducts and reservoirs, you can deal with being prohibited from further draining the water resources we all share.
As has been noted elsewhere, McDonald's hasn't changed the brew temperature for their coffee, although I thought I'd heard somewhere that they did drop the hold temperature for coffee down somewhat. I could be mistaken on that point, but I do know that now they label their coffee cups with a message to the effect "this cup contains hot liquid. Do you think you can avoid spilling it in your crotch? Can you? Huh?" After all, I don't think McDonalds ever said their coffee was good for bathing genitalia.
From the trial, the plaintiff had documented evidence where McDonald's told their restaurants to keep coffee at 180-190 F. This is 30 F from boiling. The recommended temperature is between 155 and 175 for taste and comfort considerations.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Everyone's so worried about the three-letter organizations. Guess we'd better worry about the four-letter ones (best described using four-letter words).
Silly lawsuits are the American way! It's well known all around the world.
I suggest we fix it... One simple rule change will do it. If you file suit and loose, you pay both sides' legal fees.
This would make it less likely for folks to file marginal lawsuits .
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
I knew some guys who had done that three times previously. The fourth time they went for it, the court noticed it and seized everything. Their company went into receivership until the court was able to sell it - patents, inventory and all. The guys pulling this scam lost (after winning huge three times in succession).
That is only true based on the local and state laws where you may happen to be. Where I am for instance, it doesn't matter if you're doing a complete rebuild of a property that already has hookups, all permits are treated as "new builds" for the purposes of connecting to sewer, water, electricity &/or natural gas.
@Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
re I live, it costs more in permits than materials to build a two-bedroom house.
Bullshit.
Even in the most expensive parts of the country, you could barely manage to build an uninhabitable, unfinished shell of a house for the price of a building permit.
It's not the cost of the building permit itself, per se, but the hidden cost of kickbacks...
This isn't the sig you're looking for... Move along.
Still, water connection is a construction cost, not a permit cost. It is a requirement to pass inspection.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
There are some places in Canada were the permits cost are huge.. Think about a construction permit fee based on the lot size (multiple $$$ per square feet) where the minimum lot size is required to be at least something close to an hectare...
Some actual numbers would have been nice. Otherwise you're just saying mumble mumble blah blah
Well, If you build a new house in Toronto as part of a development you are forced to pay an infrastructure fee = huge cost. If you build on an existing infill lot it is a lot less, and cheapest is if you buy a house, tear it down and build a new one.
This process can take years because it is part of a scheme to increase housing costs
So John Smith files suit against MegaCorp Inc. (with a legitimate claim) but MegaCorp's army of lawyers buries Smith in motion after motion, draining his coffers dry. When he loses (because he doesn't have enough money left to continue) he's on the hook for the millions of dollars in expenses MegaCorp's army of accountants can somehow link to the case.
There needs to be some protection for this situation, but there also needs to be consequences for "spaghetti suing" -- filing lawsuits against anyone and everyone and seeing which ones get settled and which ones stick. Maybe a superlinear increase in the cost to file suits based on the number of suits you've filed? If you want to file suit in a given issue against two or three people, you're not going to pay much extra, but if you want to sue a hundred people separately you're going to pay through the nose. [And you're not allowed to "lump together" people without showing a good reason to lump them together.]
The purpose of development charges is to defray (some of) the costs to local government that they would otherwise incur for doing things like connecting your new home to the water, sewer, electrical, and any other utilities;
Except there is no legal way to opt out of those things, due to revenue-generating requirements in the local ordinances. So that makes it just as onerous and unnecessarily expensive. That is, you can't just say "I will be using X and Y homesteading technologies to supply my own water, sanitation, and power".
construction of roads and streetlights;
Those things are provided by local property taxes, developer stipends, and other fees unrelated to specific new home construction. And, again, there is no provision for allowing discounts / credits for putting in your own security lighting at the street, or having built your own access road.
construction and purchase of additional emergency services equipment (fire trucks and fire houses, etc.); construction or enlargement of water reservoirs, sewage treatment plants, and electrical substations....
Again, there are developer fees and stipends as well as property taxes that pay for these things. You're claiming that the local government is required to double, triple, and quintuple -dip because every stage of development planning is subject to multiple levels of zoning, land use planning, urban development planning, and developer approval requests all of which the government gets more dips. Presumably the government should already be ready for this new single family, because the lot is available, sold, zoned, and all it needs now is 4 walls and a roof - but, no, you'll need to double your budget because the local Lord needs his tribute, shitizen!
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
How about the tech companies sue the USPTO to recover damages ? That way, the USPTO will be more diligent in their duties. I understand they are understaffed and all, but that is no excuse for granting bogus patents. The best way to stop this scam is to hit USPTO where it hurts - their pocketbook. The USPTO is not a neutral third-party in this dispute.
If you were to instead demolish an existing home and replace it with a new one of similar size, the building permit costs would be far less than $30,000, since the home would already have water, sewer, roads, electrical service....
This is actually 100% false. Instead, it would cost you more, because now you have permitting from several agencies required for the demolition and removal of debris, and you still have to pay all the concomitant costs required for new construction.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
What kind of moron moves to a desert and expects water to be plentful and chep?
That's a vast oversimplification.
Most significantly, the temperature people generally serve coffee at is, in fact, hot enough go give third-degree burns. The general recommended temperature to store coffee at before serving is 185 degrees (farenheit, obviously). The truth is neither that the lawsuit was totally frivolous, nor that it was totally justified, but that this was a complicated situation with a number of issues that generally get glossed over.
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
Your brewer should maintain a water temperature between 195 - 205 degrees Fahrenheit for optimal extraction. Colder water will result in flat, underextracted coffee while water that is too hot will also cause a loss of quality in the taste of the coffee. If you are brewing the coffee manually, let the water come to a full boil, but do not overboil. Turn off the heat source and allow the water to rest a minute before pouring it over the grounds.
So, Umm....
The real thing to know here is that no one at the time did not know that McDonalds coffee was really hot. Many went there for that reason. Fuck that bitch.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Actual specification for that area was, in 2008, 8000 to 9000 square meters per plot; 95$ per square meter of lot size plus 150$ per square meter of habitation for the construction permit. Other requirements were two stories, full masonry, hidden garage entrance and no roof slopes at less than 12-12.
Needless to say we went somewhere else.. having had that kind of money I really would have liked to build at that place though.
Maybe a superlinear increase in the cost to file suits based on the number of suits you've filed?
Generally the law is meant to treat everyone as equal, though... (Unless, you know, you're rich, or something, but it's a nice ideal to aim for.)
Recommended by who? Coffee should be brewed at 90C and served fresh, which means close to 90C. If it is stored colder than that, it will still be served colder than freshly brewed coffee...
If by anywhere you mean the US, yes. It would still count as cold coffee in Europe, so no, no one is going to sue over coffee colder than normal.
Also part of building costs are the appliances, such as stove, which are considered in most places as part of the house.
You can get crappy stuff new for a few hundred bucks. No big deal.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
You brew and serve at the same temperature, 'eh?
Still, water connection is a construction cost, not a permit cost. It is a requirement to pass inspection.
Making the water connection is a construction cost. If you live near the street, it will only itself cost a few hundred dollars, including the backflow preventer that you're required to have if you live on a flood plain — and everyone not on a mountain around here pretty much does that. That is, unless you live smack in the middle of town and you're required to pay the city to dig up the street for you, or something silly like that.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Serving and brewing temperatures are not the same...
Also. Are you stating that people buy coffee at McDonalds were surprised by the temp?
If you buy really hot coffee don't fucking spill it. That bitch took away other peoples hot coffee because she was stupid and unwilling to pay for her own mistakes.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
So even if I'm spending an extra ~$100k to build a 'water neutral' house* that doesn't need a water or sewer connection, I still need the connections to pass inspection?
*I'm either an insanely rich 'green' or disaster prepper.
I don't read AC A human right
It's both a permit and a construction cost in most localities. Same with sewer (if you can get a permit at any cost).
I'm not a coffee drinker, so I have no real interest in this, but I do remember that many restaurants in my city of the time turned down their serving temperatures to what the plaintiff's lawyers said was a good safe temperature.
Within a day coffee drinkers were screaming at the companies to turn the temperature back up, and there were even public death threats against the grannie.
I don't read AC A human right
They also pointed out that the most frequent complaint they had about their coffee was that is wasn't hot enough when served.
various coffee drinking group
WTF are coffee drinking groups? You mean the general population, i.e. people who drink coffee, or snobs like those wankers who call themselves "wine connoisseurs"?
The recommended temperature is between 155 and 175 for taste and comfort considerations.
National Coffee Association - 180-185 ;)
Coffee Detective - People prefer coffee served at between 155-175, with a massive preference towards 175. Of course, with the popularity of iced coffee drinks today, one might extend that down to 33F.
Bunn: 175-185 Holding temp, 155-175 Serving
The thing to remember about McD coffee is that people often let it sit for a bit before drinking it - reaching the office, for example.
I don't read AC A human right
In that case, you settle out of court before you run out of money. I would suggest perhaps a maximum fee recovery, based upon the kind of suit filed, unless the winner wants to pursue their full costs. by filing suit. But in order to get your full cost back, you have to prove that you didn't drag it out and run up costs though procedural delay.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
but that this was a complicated situation with a number of issues that generally get glossed over.
Including that there are vast numbers of people who WANT their coffee that hot, and will burn you in effigy if you suggest/force turning the temperature down. During the McD coffee lawsuit a number of stores and restaurants turned down the temperature to what the lawyers were recommending and people went insane. Boycotts, actual protests with signs, death threats against the burned woman, etc...
I don't read AC A human right
How long before Lumen View ask for this to be removed from search engines in Europe?
but do not overboil
Because there's nothing worse than burnt water.....wankers.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
No matter how you look at it, it is not a permit cost. It is either a construction cost or a utility cost, not a permit cost. Also living in the city typically will not require digging up the street, because they already have the connections there.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
Wrong. Coffee can't get hotter than boiling. What is wrong with serving boiling coffee? (Other than a somewhat inferior taste...) I never take for granted that I can drink my coffee immediately - I lift the cup, notice it is steaming, feel the heat on my lips without actually taking a sip. Then I let it wait a bit.
Anyone who have made coffee on a stove, or microwave, (or even an open fire) will have made it too hot sometimes. And it is the same with tea or chocolate. Nobody sane trust hot beverages. Not at a restaurant, not at a friends house, not when making it myself.
No matter how you look at it, it is not a permit cost. It is either a construction cost or a utility cost, not a permit cost.
That would be true if I were talking about making the connection in the first place, and not just paying for the permit for the connection.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
This could all be fixed by issuing the original patent provisionally, and mandating a second, more thorough review by the patent office when the decorative sabre is first unsheathed.
Maybe the target of the action files an application for second-stage examination and ponies up a small fee on the order of $1000, then the patent office adds the patent to their public "notice of re-examination" board for sixty days to solicit any other public input. After the examination, the target recovers from the patent holder $250 for every claim shot down and another $5000 if the entire patent falls (the patent infringement action could permit the patent holder to exercise only certain claims, so as not to place themselves on the hook for the claim-reversal penalty award on every frivolous claim, but they still owe the $5000 penalty award if claims associated with the infringement action is reduced to the empty set).
Second-stage ratification doesn't need to be a big thing. It only needs to be as big as what the first-stage examination was originally presupposed to accomplish when this whole system was first set up, back when it was possible for a patent examiner to have his or her finger on the pulse of innovation to any extent at all, before human knowledge blue-shifted by a further six orders of magnitude.
To a first approximation, given enough eyeballs, all claims are hollow.
What we really need is a mechanical turk to challenge claims of novel art and claims of application (which should be separated). If the patent holder wished to instigate second-phase examination without filing against an adversary (so as to increase their litigational certitude before uncasking their powder), they would need to post $10,000 as a bounty fund. The public would be invited to submit arguments against any particular claim (much like a bug-tracking system). Maybe there's a $5 fee per hundred words (minimum $5) for each argument filed. The first argument (by filing time) to unseat a claim is awarded a $250 refutation bounty from the bounty fund.
Even better, people are allowed to pay $5 to click "me too". All the "me too" payments are funnelled to the person who originally filed the item (small profit, same day). All parties split the bounty (including the item owner) if that item scores (the incentive to be the fiftieth person to click "me too" is not attractive; by interpolation, the "me too" button functions as a prediction market).
I think we just need to bring a mechanical turk free market processes to bear on the patent approval system, and abuses would soon be dramatically scaled back.
If a company just wants to accumulate patents it could potentially waggle, nothing changes, and all the same press releases can still be penned (mentions of patents pursued would mean less, now being more frail in the waggling, but this is the usual erosion of sense anyone shrewd has long observed).
Uhm, erm, ok 30k. But since we're talking permits here, let's go ahead and strip out those other costs.
1) Connecting to city water. That costs money. It's undeground - and most cities don't have their own work crews these days, instead they contract out to someone who makes profit on top of that.
2) Connecting to city sewer. That costs even more money. It's also underground, but often times pretty darned deep. You're going to rip up some road for that, dig a trench, all of that
3) Electricity - sometimes underground sometimes overhead. Is there a local step down transformer? No? They're going to need one of those too! Or maybe the current transformer is already overloaded.
Of your 30k in "permits" for your building costs that are already closer to 45k based on your opinion, we're talking probably 20k at least in construction related to connecting sewer, water, electricity, and hey maybe even gas. Ripping up streets and sidewalks costs money - and so does fixing them afterwords. Do you expect the city is just going to foot the bill for that??
And don't even talk to me about your own wells or own septic tank. Those days are over - and mostly for good reason.
My brother-in-law is a seasoned contractor, if you count actually having built +50 residential units.
Seasoned contrators typically do not "buy and store" in bulk because the storage costs are higher than you think, that's money out of the "invest in the next lot" cycle, damage is inevitable, theft is guaranteed for everything that isn't locked down (workers see it as side pay, but their "friends" pick up materials in the dead of night), you transport the materials twice (a nontrivial expense), and for many materials (faucets, etc), not having an exact count on hand is a loss.
My brother was a seasoned AC installer for one of the huge builders, and even they didn't buy and store. They used Just in Time inventory techniques. Basically, anyone who argues a buy and store doesn't know much about the business.
Can you please link me to this? The only permit in Cali that I know of to connect to the water system is for public works, not individuals.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
That's funny, becuase the Judge that made the judgement was particularly pissed off with McDonald's having already violated one court order to reduce their coffee temperature. But you wouldn't know that, would you? Such pesky facts interfere with your grand design of how the lawsuit system is already irreparably broken. I guess you will take it on faith that your statements make sense, considering that you are ignoring all of the facts. (Is there a pattern here? hint, hint)
It depends on how you market it. McDonald's own lawyers lost the argument with their "ready to drink" definition that included having it cool for 10 minutes so it would only incur second degree burns.
And of course, they had to install special coffee makers to raise the temperatures. A non-McDonald's coffee maker couldn't generate that much heat; because, the coffee maker would have to be more of a pressure cooker to go above boiling.
All of it to save 3 cents per cup.
They even ignored the first court order to lower their temperature; because, the lawsuits were cheaper to deflect than the cost savings of 3 cents per cup. When the judge got wind of it, he slammed McDonalds for being a scofflaw.
I'd wager that the judge is fully aware of that and has issued appropriate orders freezing assets until such time as it is determined which assets should actually be seized permanently. This judge DID just rule that Lumen View is a patent troll who is abusing the court system. Judges don't like it when you do that. Three years from now, the people involved might ultimately get their bank accounts released, but the judge knows how to make it an expensive pita to get the order overturned.
But that's not U.S. In the U.S., I'd ballpark $1500 for a completely new house for permits in an incorporated metro area.
A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
In a place that serves a lot of coffee, so that it's always freshly brewed, into low thermal mass, insulating cups - heck yes, they will be very close together, within 10F or so.
A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
That's like kickback rates in corrupt countries (which is most) where the "fee" to get your building approved is 10%. Good one Canada, aping nations with little growth andd little contribution to the world.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Well, large high class development often have higher costs for those parameters. You have much less houses per linear foot of frontage, increasing the cost of bringing water, taking sewer out, and building roads. That area was rocky and had a lot of slope, thus it was easy to understand that the development costs were high, and the city can't be building this without making it back.
The promoter who was selling the plots was also the only one allowed to build in the area; or rather, he would not sell a plot of land if you weren't signing for the house at the same time.
I built my house in a regular development zone, still 6000 square meters of land, and the total permit cost was around 200$ CAD at that time (tree clearing, house, underground electricity, drinking water, sewage and pool permits)
Years ago when I was in the Navy we had a 30 cup coffee urn in the engine room. The guy who made a fresh pot at the start of the watch failed to secured the urn to cabinet top it sat on. After the coffee had made he was digging inside the cabinet for some tools when the ship rolled and the entire contents spilled down his back. All the skin of his back came off with his tee shirt when they snatched it off. The guy had to be medivacked off the ship.
When I read this, I thought: "Finally! Shake in fear, patent trolls!"
After 'N' number of times the sleazy lawyers file for bankruptcy using this tactic, the law should be changed so that judge can pierce the corporate veil and go after the directors of the corp personally. This abuse of the protection from legal liability that incorporation affords.
Where were you setting up? I'm in the process of looking for land and have looked at the cost of building a 40x40 house (Estimated) + 28x30 garage on a 2 acre lot. The range I was giving for a building permit was 60 000 to 80 000. This is in the GTA (Grand Toronto Area).
I can only see rates like this for building downtown Toronto or Vancouver and even that seems high. Was there a deposit included in that? I know they require a deposit in some areas. What they do is pay it back to you after they look to see if you damaged surrounding infrastructures (road, sidewalk...) while building your house.
If this had been in force between 1976 and 1988, no one would have dared to expose Ford in the Pinto " death for profit " scheme for fear of Ford extorting huge 'costs' onto the losers.
Loser pays is just another way of insulating the wealthier party in any dispute from any civil justice whatever.
A patent troll falls. Tomorrow it is the old lady GELDED by McD's 210 F coffee who gets screwed over for the last time.
Let's not cheer this more than it is worth. Let's think about what the Supreme Court has just done to civil justice in America.
There are perfectly good ways to nail the patent trolls without this
This was a `no subvention` development on the south shore of the St-Lawrence river near Quebec city. In this case, the total permits costs had to cover the full extent of the development costs of the land. Typically, they would absorb the costs on your property taxes over the years, thus showing a much smaller amount.
The land is orginally owned by the city generally, so you can not just decide on your own to dig a well and bury your waste, as those can adversely affect your neighbors.
Homesteading is fine, if you're all alone by yourself with no neighbors and no downstream runoff and you manage to somehow acquire the land free and clear of all government supports and subsidies (ie, nothing in America remotely fits that description, if you go back far enough there are Spanish, English, and native American rights to contend with). Granted some states are much more generous with this than others.
That case is the poster boy for people who don't bother to look up facts and just want "proof" that the legal system (aka the government) is out of control.
NCDA. The National Coffee Drinker's Association, protecting your rights to burn your genitals off, because that's still better than letting the government get their hands on them.
You can get a lawsuit almost anywhere for almot any reason. Actually winning the lawsuit is another matter. The thing is, the people who keep trotting out this example seem to think that they can use prior restraint and forbid the actual filing of lawsuits. Half the cases I read about in the knee jerk "fix the legal system!" mailing lists are about cases that never actually make it to court.
It's impossible to apply common sense outside of the court system. Who gets to be the decider of what is common sense or not? Most of these cases that seem obvious actually have complex issues to resolve with plenty of people on both sides.
Can you please link me to this? The only permit in Cali that I know of to connect to the water system is for public works, not individuals.
It's not the state, it's the county. After the state gets done with you, the county and the city (where applicable) still get to run you over a few times.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Your first comparison of 42000 to 30000 does not prove your point
Don't you mean 45000 to 30000?
Also, ROFL! I didn't even notice that they were essentially claiming that $45,000 is less than $30,000 ($30,000 in permits and "other stuff", vs $1000 * $45/ft^2 = $45,000) until you pointed it out. Bravo, bravo!
Also, ROFL! I didn't even notice that they were essentially claiming that $45,000 is less than $30,000 ($30,000 in permits and "other stuff", vs $1000 * $45/ft^2 = $45,000) until you pointed it out. Bravo, bravo!
You didn't notice that because I didn't say it. That's the price of building a home from a kit, as in, someone else does all the cutting of all the parts, and that includes freight fees. It's amazing what someone who understands the language a comment is written in can garner by actually reading the fucking thing, as any intelligent person would do.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The land is orginally owned by the city generally, so you can not just decide on your own to dig a well and bury your waste, as those can adversely affect your neighbors.
No, no it wasn't. That's not only the most asinine excuse for trampling of property rights I've ever heard, it's also unsupportable from a legal and common law viewpoint.
nothing in America remotely fits that description, if you go back far enough there are Spanish, English, and native American rights to contend with
The US Constitution eliminated the "divine right of kings", including England's and Spain's, to make claim to all real property. It established for the first time a country that recognized individual rights to property. Native American rights are different, and despite some of us feeling they should have superior right of supremacy to all land claims, the law only recognizes certain specific areas as tribal grounds, and that has absolutely ZERO impact on those acres in a residential or rural zoned area that you purchased from the prior deeded owner.
Local ordinances that allow the government to sell your property at auction for 1/3 of the value because you were late paying the $1.86 balance on your property tax bill are nothing but theft.
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
As others are saying, do you serve at the temperature you brew at?
You should take some time to read about the case. Do you think the jurors found in favor of the victim because they thought it was a great way to make a buck and they wanted to help her out?
Check out what 3rd degree burns to the groin look like: http://justicebeforecharity.or... (I would say this is NSFW, and I have no idea why I can't find a better source for this.) I would say that most people don't appreciate the seriousness of the case because they don't really understand the injury.
There is an interview with Stella's daughter here: http://youtu.be/i2ktM-lIfeQ
Before we go to far on it, it should also be noted that the lady in question only sued them for a relatively small amount (medical bills, $50K if I recall although it's been a while) - McD's *refused* to pay, and took it to court where they lost big time. They really would have been far better off just settling with her like she wanted originally.
ugh, less than $50K, serves me right for using the LT sign. Article you linked to says $20K.
Any money in becoming a patent troll troll?
When you get down to it, at some point in the past the land you own now was stolen by someone, and then granted by the government to a landholder. The land was never created by the landholder. For example, in the US most land was obtained by taking it away from the original native Americans without fair compensation (usually no compensation). Sometimes this was wholesale, ala the homestead act which opened up whole swaths of the country to whoever could get their first, and then defended afterwords with by the army.
The US constitution may have eliminate the divine right and recognized (not for the first time) individual rights to property, but it only recognized that right for a subset of the inhabitants. What's really different from some European lord taking a peasants land a thousand years ago and claiming it is now his, versus some European settler claiming the land as his new farm and then driving off by force the natives who protested? What mattered on the ground is who had the guns and knew how to use them the best (thus the natives lost the land as well as England).
What it comes down to though is that someone who sits on a parcel of land and declares that it is his kingdom and he can do whatever they hell he wants with it, flipping his finger at the government, only has that land in the first place because of a succession of governments that took control of that land and parceled it out. The government created the laws that gave that person the land, and it makes sense that the government can place additional restrictions on the use of the land ("we have altered the deal, pray we do not alter it further").
After long enough time it's sort of moot who was there first. Things evolve so that instead of a constant threat of the original inhabitants trying to take things back you start relying on a system of laws that provide a more orderly transition and arbitration.
Yep. From my link:
Liebeck sought to settle with McDonald's for $20,000 to cover her actual and anticipated expenses. Her past medical expenses were $10,500; her anticipated future medical expenses were approximately $2,500; and her loss of income was approximately $5,000 for a total of approximately $18,000. With this information, the company offered her $800.
It's just that the court also awarded compensation for less tangible costs, and valued it at $200,000, of which they McD's was judged responsible for 160,000, the other $40,000 being the proportion that was Liebeck's own fault for spilling of coffee on herself.
They also awarded a lot of punitive damages. I'm not sure how much if any of those were to be awarded to Liebeck. It might not have even been decided, because both parties appealed, and then settled out of court.
The US constitution may have eliminate the divine right and recognized (not for the first time) individual rights to property
Yes, it was, indeed, the first time a system of government was established that recognized individual rights to real property. And now the US is using techniques from Agenda 21 to end it.
So you support the return to Divine Right of Kings, with the government having ownership of all land and the citizens only get tenancy?
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
Was this her first time getting coffee at McDonalds? No. She knew how hot the coffee was and wanted it.
Why are we so quick to ensure that no person ever has to take responsibility for their own actions. She knew how hot the coffee was. She chose to go there and have that coffee and she spilled the coffee. Lets kill McDonalds?
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
I've heard of places like that. Have you looked into a composting toilet and such?
In my area many people either have water trucked in or bring it in themselves via a giant tank in the back of their truck.
How does the septic system get to be that expensive? Having to deal with permafrost?
I don't read AC A human right