Actually, Article I, Sec. 8 of the Constitution gives Congress authority to grant patents and copyrights. However, it is not specifically denied to the states - it is up to Congress, under the Supremacy Clause, to decide whether to allow states to regulate the same areas. For example, states had independent copyright laws until the 1970s, until Congress took that power away. With that said, it's a meaningless issue here, as the Federal government has in fact blocked parallel state rulemaking regarding patents.
However, the doctrine of sovereign immunity and the 11th amendment make it hard to prosecute state governments for patent or copyright infringement. So a statewide agency could just start making patented drugs, and it would be hard to stope them
yes - the court would allow you (a plaintiff) to try and show that a reasonable network administrator, as opposed to a reasonable plumber, should have installed such filters. Your real problem would be that there is no established art in configuring a network which requires such filters. Sure, it makes good sense for the whole community to do so. But since no-one does, you cannot have any expectation that your neighbor was negligent in not protecting you.
To use the loaded gun example - the problem with leaving a loaded gun around is its uniqueness. If everyone had a loaded gun on their porch, there could be no reasonable claim that anyone was acting unjustly (stupidly, yes).
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, Article I, Sec. 8 of the Constitution gives Congress authority to grant patents and copyrights. However, it is not specifically denied to the states - it is up to Congress, under the Supremacy Clause, to decide whether to allow states to regulate the same areas. For example, states had independent copyright laws until the 1970s, until Congress took that power away. With that said, it's a meaningless issue here, as the Federal government has in fact blocked parallel state rulemaking regarding patents.
However, the doctrine of sovereign immunity and the 11th amendment make it hard to prosecute state governments for patent or copyright infringement. So a statewide agency could just start making patented drugs, and it would be hard to stope them
Just wanted to be on record. Best wishes to the both of you.
yes - the court would allow you (a plaintiff) to try and show that a reasonable network administrator, as opposed to a reasonable plumber, should have installed such filters. Your real problem would be that there is no established art in configuring a network which requires such filters. Sure, it makes good sense for the whole community to do so. But since no-one does, you cannot have any expectation that your neighbor was negligent in not protecting you.
To use the loaded gun example - the problem with leaving a loaded gun around is its uniqueness. If everyone had a loaded gun on their porch, there could be no reasonable claim that anyone was acting unjustly (stupidly, yes).