I absolutely agree. The posts on Groklaw often rub me the wrong way too; and that's hard to do since I enjoy being rubbed so much. Although I too am pro-FOSS and would like to see SCO die a slow painful death, I would also like to see some attempt at objectivity when reporting the developments in the SCO case and other related events. It's like PJ is way too invested in the developments and sees everything as black and white.
A few years back, when I was a law student, I wrote my law review student note on trusted computing (published last year). I've made it available here if anyone is interested. Not sure I still agree with the thesis but hey, I was ensconced in academia when I wrote it.
I completely disagree. I have an EE BS and a CS MS and a JD (law degreee). When I was working as a software engineer, nobody gave a hoot where I went to college or grad school. But the law, on the other hand, is all about where you went to law school (unfortunately). I do want to echo a previous poster and say that you should go to grad school. I learned literally everything I used in my engineering jobs in my masters work. You should definitely have fun in college and take grad school much more seriously.
Maybe he just wanted to inject the pool of technology-ignorant lawyers with a dose of tech knowledge. That's why I made the switch. You should be overjoyed that hackers are becoming lawyers. Then maybe we can finally fix the law....
actually, a simple trademark registration is somewhere around $350. and yes, a company can file an "intent to use" registration, giving them six months to actually use the mark in relation to a product.
I have an MS in computer engineering and worked as a software engineer for 6 years in the "real world" before deciding that I wanted to change the world. My solution was law. I'm going into my second year in law school and just finished a summer working as a patent agent (to make some money for school). I'm so glad I made the move.
Once I graduate I'm planning to do EFF type stuff.
This case is somewhat similar to Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. 783 (1984) where a California resident sued National Enquirer and its employees, based in Florida, for libel. Basically, at least for print media, there is a three part test (taken from this case):
1. The defendant must have committed an intentional tort (e.g. libel) 2. The plaintiff must have felt the brunt of the harm in the forum 3. The defendant must have expressly aimed his tortious conduct at the forum
Basically, if the author knows where the person they are writing about resides, they should expect suit in that forum.
And the active/passive distinction may not matter for a tort. Also, there may very well be general jurisdiction over the author if they have a significant presence in the forum state.
(A question was raised earlier about how to get into federal court. One way is diversity: the P and the D are from different states. But then again general jurisdiction may destroy diversity...The other way to get into federal court is in a "federal question" case--a case involving a federal statute, or the rare federal common law...)
A strong enough mark captures the entire world. The top example of this is "Kodak" it is an arbitrary mark that has an incredible amount of distincitiveness. Everyone in the world knows their products. The key test is "Liklihood of confusion." If I saw a Kodak-brand hammer, I would probably conclude that Kodak was launching a line of tools for whatever reason. But what if they didn't?
I was following your train of thought but was disappointed when you got to the end and didn't apply your reasoning to the topic at hand. There was no conclusion.
Also, is a trademarked brand name the same as a trademarked product name? Your argument about Kodak might not apply to light sabers, since it's not a brand. Does the "reasonable person" standard apply here? Would a reasonable person think that Lucas Films had manufactured surgical equipment?
As a software engineer (going on 8 years if you count comp sci grad school), and as a soon-to-be first year law student, I can answer this from my perspective. One of the many reasons I'm going into law is to make sure people who understand technology are influencing decisions and defending the rights of the people making a real difference in this world.
If it's not clear where my heart is, let me just mention that I had UNIX on my license plate for 3 years. But in my "old age" I've become less interested in code and more interested in arguing;)
Once again, I am forced to wonder whether Jon Katz proofreads his work. I know it's normal for a few typos to appear in any written piece. But his pieces seem to consistently contain an abnormal amount!
I'm sorry. That quote is NOT Homer Simpson. I forget who it is but I used to have it on my favorite quotes page and I know it much older than the Simpsons.
I have read most of Hofstadter's books (GEB, Mind's I, the one about fonts, and Metamagical Themas). I'm too scared by the size of LTDBM to pick it up just yet.
I was pleasantly surprised to see this review, and then this thread, since this book has also been sitting on my shelf for months and on my mental list of books to read for what seems like a year. By the way, why is this review appearing now when the book isn't all that new?
I guess I had nothing of substance to say except, Ra ra ra!
Alright, who else has or has had a UNIX license plate? I had one when I lived in Vermont (up til last May). I live in GA now and opted out of getting one for various reasons. Wishing I had kept it now.
Slashdot Mirror
I absolutely agree. The posts on Groklaw often rub me the wrong way too; and that's hard to do since I enjoy being rubbed so much. Although I too am pro-FOSS and would like to see SCO die a slow painful death, I would also like to see some attempt at objectivity when reporting the developments in the SCO case and other related events. It's like PJ is way too invested in the developments and sees everything as black and white.
A few years back, when I was a law student, I wrote my law review student note on trusted computing (published last year). I've made it available here if anyone is interested. Not sure I still agree with the thesis but hey, I was ensconced in academia when I wrote it.
http://actusre.us/cjam/woodford.pdf
I completely disagree. I have an EE BS and a CS MS and a JD (law degreee). When I was working as a software engineer, nobody gave a hoot where I went to college or grad school. But the law, on the other hand, is all about where you went to law school (unfortunately). I do want to echo a previous poster and say that you should go to grad school. I learned literally everything I used in my engineering jobs in my masters work. You should definitely have fun in college and take grad school much more seriously.
Maybe he just wanted to inject the pool of technology-ignorant lawyers with a dose of tech knowledge. That's why I made the switch. You should be overjoyed that hackers are becoming lawyers. Then maybe we can finally fix the law....
actually, a simple trademark registration is somewhere around $350. and yes, a company can file an "intent to use" registration, giving them six months to actually use the mark in relation to a product.
IANA(TM)L
I have an MS in computer engineering and worked as a software engineer for 6 years in the "real world" before deciding that I wanted to change the world. My solution was law. I'm going into my second year in law school and just finished a summer working as a patent agent (to make some money for school). I'm so glad I made the move.
Once I graduate I'm planning to do EFF type stuff.
Wood
This case is somewhat similar to Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. 783 (1984) where a California resident sued National Enquirer and its employees, based in Florida, for libel. Basically, at least for print media, there is a three part test (taken from this case):
1. The defendant must have committed an intentional tort (e.g. libel)
2. The plaintiff must have felt the brunt of the harm in the forum
3. The defendant must have expressly aimed his tortious conduct at the forum
Basically, if the author knows where the person they are writing about resides, they should expect suit in that forum.
And the active/passive distinction may not matter for a tort. Also, there may very well be general jurisdiction over the author if they have a significant presence in the forum state.
(A question was raised earlier about how to get into federal court. One way is diversity: the P and the D are from different states. But then again general jurisdiction may destroy diversity...The other way to get into federal court is in a "federal question" case--a case involving a federal statute, or the rare federal common law...)
Just my $0.02.
wood
A strong enough mark captures the entire world. The top example of this is "Kodak" it is an arbitrary mark that has an incredible amount of distincitiveness. Everyone in the world knows their products. The key test is "Liklihood of confusion." If I saw a Kodak-brand hammer, I would probably conclude that Kodak was launching a line of tools for whatever reason. But what if they didn't?
I was following your train of thought but was disappointed when you got to the end and didn't apply your reasoning to the topic at hand. There was no conclusion.
Also, is a trademarked brand name the same as a trademarked product name? Your argument about Kodak might not apply to light sabers, since it's not a brand. Does the "reasonable person" standard apply here? Would a reasonable person think that Lucas Films had manufactured surgical equipment?
As a software engineer (going on 8 years if you count comp sci grad school), and as a soon-to-be first year law student, I can answer this from my perspective. One of the many reasons I'm going into law is to make sure people who understand technology are influencing decisions and defending the rights of the people making a real difference in this world.
;)
If it's not clear where my heart is, let me just mention that I had UNIX on my license plate for 3 years. But in my "old age" I've become less interested in code and more interested in arguing
Chad
Everyone I know uses Yahoo IM.
Once again, I am forced to wonder whether Jon Katz proofreads his work. I know it's normal for a few
typos to appear in any written piece. But his pieces seem to consistently contain an abnormal amount!
I'm sorry. That quote is NOT Homer Simpson. I forget who it is but I used to have it on my favorite quotes page and I know it much older than the Simpsons.
I have read most of Hofstadter's books (GEB,
Mind's I, the one about fonts, and Metamagical Themas). I'm too scared by the size of LTDBM to pick it up just yet.
I was pleasantly surprised to see this review, and then this thread, since this book has also been sitting on my shelf for months and on my mental list of books to read for what seems like a year. By the way, why is this review appearing now when the book isn't all that new?
I guess I had nothing of substance to say except, Ra ra ra!
Alright, who else has or has had a UNIX license
plate? I had one when I lived in Vermont (up til
last May). I live in GA now and opted out of
getting one for various reasons. Wishing I had
kept it now.
If I only had a good picture of it scanned in...