It's probably different depending on the kind of good. If you e.g. buy a CD or DVD from Amazon UK/DE/FR/..., you can only return it if it's not been opened.
Returns in the EU are only mandated for unopened goods afaik. In case of a digital download, playing/burning can indeed very well be equated to "opening the packaging" (almost literally, if you consider the DRM as the packaging). As far as that is "worthless" as the GP said: well, it's worthless if you thought this was an incredibly easy way to get free music, but not if it's intended to e.g. help people who have 1 Click Shopping(tm)(patented) turned on and misclicked.
Please have a look at a presentation I gave in the EP to interested assistants and MEPs about this. Although it may not be that clear without the accompanying commentary, I hope it still can clarify some of the important points.
Basically, the problem is that it does not only apply to commercial scale copyright piracy and trademark counterfeiting, but also criminalises
Infringements on database rights. As you may know, database rights only apply in case a "substantial investment" occurred, but how is a competitor supposed to know this in advance? Further, case law on this new "right" is still very much in development (slides 14-15 of the presentation, e.g. a case about a company selling an electronic version of a phone directory )
Non-piracy related copyright infringements: e.g. Deutsche Bahn (the German national railway corporation) has been convicted for copyright infringement, because it altered the plans of the architect which designed their new Berlin railway station in a way which the architect considered to be infringing on his copyright. Another very nice on: a museum which is being sued for repairing an artwork which consisted of a urinal, because that person who destroyed it considered the "destroyed urinal" as a work of art in itself.
Then there are also registered and unregistered design rights, which like database rights are not examined at all for validity. If you start threatening criminal prosecution for infringing on "right" which may not be valid in the first place, you get really chilling effects in the market place.
Unlike the software patents directive, this is not a case of big companies vs small ones. Pretty much everyone except for the IFPI (music publishing industry) are trashing this directive like there's no tomorrow. And if you want to know why it is nevertheless being pushed through by the Commission, read my ENDitorial in the previous EDRI-gram.
Afaics it was a cop who said they usually find other contraband such as weapons and drugs when executing a search warrant concerning counterfeit goods, not the RIAA guy.
The fact that Microsoft also has patents on DRM does not "protect" it in any way from this particular patent owned by Red Hat. A "defensive patent" only works to the extent that you can assert it to someone who is threatening you. So unless Red Hat starts incorporating DRM stuff in its products which infringes on Microsoft's patent, it has zero defensive value against Red Hat's patent.
That said, Microsoft has a whole lot of other patents as well, and some of those are bound to cover code distributed by Red Hat. I just wanted to correct the misconception that holding a patent on something automatically protects your use of that stuff: it doesn't in any way, all it does is give you the right to prevent others from doing that. But it's quite possible you need umpteen other patent licenses yourself to be able to actually do what you describe in your patent application.
I recently got quite funny attempt like that, pumping some stock in the image attachment (which moreover looked like a captcha in order to avoid ocr). The title of the spam was however "cocaine inexcusable", and the body, well (just two sample quotes -- and yes, the two first sentences appeared together like that):
We are working with Internet Content Rating Association to make the internet safer for children. Powered by a super strong Japanese motor and gears this incredibly powerful anal probe will hit the spot every time.
The Blue Rocket is a handy little clit massager that packs a mighty punch.
Needless to say, it triggered the bayasian filter pretty heavily in spite of all the obfuscation attempts:)
1. All x86 processors support the 80 bit FPU instructions (either integrated in, or via the add-on x87 FPU)
Currently they still do, yes, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was going to phased out in the not too distant future. E.g. Win64 simply doesn't support usage of the 80x87 anymore, and requires that you use the SSE unit for all floating point math.
If you don't feel it is worthwhile to contribute to linux kernel, because other companies abuse the code then don't do it anymore.
Yes, as soon as you feel a situation is going wrong just walk away. Please don't even dream about speaking up about it, regardless of how much time and effort you previously invested in it. Just give up and go do something else, so you can repeat this cycle.
Actually, everyone can reply, but the replies are invisible (except if it's a reply to your own post and you've turned on email notifications for replies). But even then the "parent" link is broken.
Actually, it means you can't have a system which automatically considers every file tagged with PONIES!!! as "interesting" (if the patent gets granted).
Yes, we really should all start working for free for the big companies helping them vet their patent applications. Come on, if a bureaucratic government run monopoly-granting system is broken you do not solve that by making the people work for you for free (in particular because they could be doing productive work instead, like writing or fixing software). Instead, you should fix the system.
No matter how evil you think patents are, they are not going away anytime soon. The best we can do is to better the current situation by supporting efforts such as this.
This band aid does not solve any problems (the big companies will still own all the software patents and will still be able to squash the competition with them), and actually makes the productivity loss caused by software patents even bigger since more people are wasting their time on them.
The only thing it might do is make the system a little more bearable for these large (ab)users of the patent system. This means it *will* take longer for them to drown in the mess they are creating and pushing for with all the software patents, resulting in even more immobility and less energy spent on solving the core problem.
So no, working for free for the IBM patent review department is not the best thing you can do.
Excuse me, but since WHEN did "the people" have ANYTHING to say in any government of a "large" country, ever ?
Well, the EU is not a country, but we as an NGO composed of "the people" surely had quite an influence on the software patents debate in Europe. And yes, there was a lot of undemocratic crap happening. But it's too fatalistic to think you can't have influence or even win. It does cost a lot of effort (I and several others basically spent two or even more years of our life on almost only this), you lose several battles, you'll get called anything from communist to terrorist, but that does not mean you can't have influence or that you can't even win.
Few people want to spend so much of their life on battles where they think the odds of winning are very low though, so in general you either need a very perseverant and inspiring figurehead person, or a situation which is so dire that the masses finally snap. We had the former.
The difference, ever so subtle, is that "the people" can only "elect" those they want to SPEAK FOR THEM, instead of speaking for themselves.
Direct democracy does not work in practice (either, if you like) if it's done for everything. That said, the problem is that most of "the people" think they've done their duty after they've cast their vote. Companies and lobbyists understand that's only the beginning. "The people" should understand that as well. But yes, it requires a lot of effort and most people don't feel like doing that, because "the politicians are paid so much to do their job, so why should I invest my free time in making sure they do it right?".
With that attitude you don't get anywhere, except in a place where you can complain even more about how the world and politics suck.
The simple question "what is a software patent?" is suprizingly difficult.
It's actually pretty easy to get a definition of "pure" software patents: any patent with either program product claims, or whose process claims can be reworded like one of those.
Unfortunately, I can't find a link to it, but recently I read an article about a new social housing project in Belgium where the houses in that neighbourhood would get their warm water in this way. I don't believe it was used for electricity though.
That's a non-argument. In fact, in Europe novelty and non-obviousness are even two completely distinct patentability requirements. This argument also misses the point that the fact that nobody already published something about doing that (since this is the actual criterium for novelty/non-obviousness) does not mean it was not obvious.
In fact, it may have been so obvious that nobody actually saw the point of publishing something about it (like what's the case with many software patents), which paradoxically makes it quite hard to invalidate the patent based on absence of novelty/non-obviousness.
They all rely on the "we only have to be better than the neighbour's mailserver" principle.
Greylisting in combination with blacklisting also has another advantage: by the time the message is no longer greylisted, there is a higher chance that the spamming server is already blacklisted.
I think a lot of people would notice, because quite a few middleware, reporting tools and websites use iText to generate PDF's. Some examples are Adobe's (formerly Macromedia's) Coldfusion, Google Calendar and JasperReports. End users may not know it, but it wouldn't surprise me if most PDF's out there are generated with tools not sold by Adobe (not only iText, but also e.g. pdflatex and things like that).
CNN International isn't bad. Last week I was in the US, and the difference with the US CNN is like day and night. The news on CNN International looks like a regular European news channel (or at least Western European news channel, I have no experience with Eastern European news channels so I can't say anything about those).
The US version of CNN is much more sensationalist/agitated/excited imho. And almost completely US-focussed, it seems.
Slashdot Mirror
It's probably different depending on the kind of good. If you e.g. buy a CD or DVD from Amazon UK/DE/FR/..., you can only return it if it's not been opened.
Returns in the EU are only mandated for unopened goods afaik. In case of a digital download, playing/burning can indeed very well be equated to "opening the packaging" (almost literally, if you consider the DRM as the packaging). As far as that is "worthless" as the GP said: well, it's worthless if you thought this was an incredibly easy way to get free music, but not if it's intended to e.g. help people who have 1 Click Shopping(tm)(patented) turned on and misclicked.
Most corporations are none too happy with it either for these reasons.
Please have a look at a presentation I gave in the EP to interested assistants and MEPs about this. Although it may not be that clear without the accompanying commentary, I hope it still can clarify some of the important points.
Basically, the problem is that it does not only apply to commercial scale copyright piracy and trademark counterfeiting, but also criminalises
Alleged trademark confusion, e.g. Burger King v. Wholebake, or L'oreal SA & Ors v Bellure NV & Ors
Infringements on database rights. As you may know, database rights only apply in case a "substantial investment" occurred, but how is a competitor supposed to know this in advance? Further, case law on this new "right" is still very much in development (slides 14-15 of the presentation, e.g. a case about a company selling an electronic version of a phone directory )
Non-piracy related copyright infringements: e.g. Deutsche Bahn (the German national railway corporation) has been convicted for copyright infringement, because it altered the plans of the architect which designed their new Berlin railway station in a way which the architect considered to be infringing on his copyright. Another very nice on: a museum which is being sued for repairing an artwork which consisted of a urinal, because that person who destroyed it considered the "destroyed urinal" as a work of art in itself.
Then there are also registered and unregistered design rights, which like database rights are not examined at all for validity. If you start threatening criminal prosecution for infringing on "right" which may not be valid in the first place, you get really chilling effects in the market place.
If you have time to read only one background paper on this completely idiotic and misguided directive, have a look at the position paper of the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys. But those of the Law Society of England and Wales and Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition and Tax Law are also very good. You can find a lot more position papers on FFII's IPRED2 workgroup page under "External opinions"
Unlike the software patents directive, this is not a case of big companies vs small ones. Pretty much everyone except for the IFPI (music publishing industry) are trashing this directive like there's no tomorrow. And if you want to know why it is nevertheless being pushed through by the Commission, read my ENDitorial in the previous EDRI-gram.
That indeed doesn't work for purchased songs.
Afaics it was a cop who said they usually find other contraband such as weapons and drugs when executing a search warrant concerning counterfeit goods, not the RIAA guy.
The fact that Microsoft also has patents on DRM does not "protect" it in any way from this particular patent owned by Red Hat. A "defensive patent" only works to the extent that you can assert it to someone who is threatening you. So unless Red Hat starts incorporating DRM stuff in its products which infringes on Microsoft's patent, it has zero defensive value against Red Hat's patent.
That said, Microsoft has a whole lot of other patents as well, and some of those are bound to cover code distributed by Red Hat. I just wanted to correct the misconception that holding a patent on something automatically protects your use of that stuff: it doesn't in any way, all it does is give you the right to prevent others from doing that. But it's quite possible you need umpteen other patent licenses yourself to be able to actually do what you describe in your patent application.
I recently got quite funny attempt like that, pumping some stock in the image attachment (which moreover looked like a captcha in order to avoid ocr). The title of the spam was however "cocaine inexcusable", and the body, well (just two sample quotes -- and yes, the two first sentences appeared together like that):
Needless to say, it triggered the bayasian filter pretty heavily in spite of all the obfuscation attempts :)
sbl contains the spamhauses, xbl trojaned boxes/open proxies etc (you can of course also only use one of them). See http://www.spamhaus.org/xbl/index.lasso
Or Object Pascal :)
Currently they still do, yes, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was going to phased out in the not too distant future. E.g. Win64 simply doesn't support usage of the 80x87 anymore, and requires that you use the SSE unit for all floating point math.
Yes, as soon as you feel a situation is going wrong just walk away. Please don't even dream about speaking up about it, regardless of how much time and effort you previously invested in it. Just give up and go do something else, so you can repeat this cycle.
They probably would not get cheaper, but the RIAA's members would get a bigger share of the pie at the expense of the artists.
Actually, everyone can reply, but the replies are invisible (except if it's a reply to your own post and you've turned on email notifications for replies). But even then the "parent" link is broken.
Says the Slashdot editor...
Actually, it means you can't have a system which automatically considers every file tagged with PONIES!!! as "interesting" (if the patent gets granted).
Yes, we really should all start working for free for the big companies helping them vet their patent applications. Come on, if a bureaucratic government run monopoly-granting system is broken you do not solve that by making the people work for you for free (in particular because they could be doing productive work instead, like writing or fixing software). Instead, you should fix the system.
This band aid does not solve any problems (the big companies will still own all the software patents and will still be able to squash the competition with them), and actually makes the productivity loss caused by software patents even bigger since more people are wasting their time on them.
The only thing it might do is make the system a little more bearable for these large (ab)users of the patent system. This means it *will* take longer for them to drown in the mess they are creating and pushing for with all the software patents, resulting in even more immobility and less energy spent on solving the core problem.
So no, working for free for the IBM patent review department is not the best thing you can do.
Well, the EU is not a country, but we as an NGO composed of "the people" surely had quite an influence on the software patents debate in Europe. And yes, there was a lot of undemocratic crap happening. But it's too fatalistic to think you can't have influence or even win. It does cost a lot of effort (I and several others basically spent two or even more years of our life on almost only this), you lose several battles, you'll get called anything from communist to terrorist, but that does not mean you can't have influence or that you can't even win.
Few people want to spend so much of their life on battles where they think the odds of winning are very low though, so in general you either need a very perseverant and inspiring figurehead person, or a situation which is so dire that the masses finally snap. We had the former.
Direct democracy does not work in practice (either, if you like) if it's done for everything. That said, the problem is that most of "the people" think they've done their duty after they've cast their vote. Companies and lobbyists understand that's only the beginning. "The people" should understand that as well. But yes, it requires a lot of effort and most people don't feel like doing that, because "the politicians are paid so much to do their job, so why should I invest my free time in making sure they do it right?".With that attitude you don't get anywhere, except in a place where you can complain even more about how the world and politics suck.
It's actually pretty easy to get a definition of "pure" software patents: any patent with either program product claims, or whose process claims can be reworded like one of those.
Unfortunately, I can't find a link to it, but recently I read an article about a new social housing project in Belgium where the houses in that neighbourhood would get their warm water in this way. I don't believe it was used for electricity though.
That's a non-argument. In fact, in Europe novelty and non-obviousness are even two completely distinct patentability requirements. This argument also misses the point that the fact that nobody already published something about doing that (since this is the actual criterium for novelty/non-obviousness) does not mean it was not obvious.
In fact, it may have been so obvious that nobody actually saw the point of publishing something about it (like what's the case with many software patents), which paradoxically makes it quite hard to invalidate the patent based on absence of novelty/non-obviousness.
Then be very surprised. IBM has a long history of strong-arming other companies with its patent portfolio and extracting license money from them. In fact, Marshall Phelps (who now works for Microsoft fwiw), turned IBM's sleeping patent portfolio into a $1+ billion profit.
I think a lot of people would notice, because quite a few middleware, reporting tools and websites use iText to generate PDF's. Some examples are Adobe's (formerly Macromedia's) Coldfusion, Google Calendar and JasperReports. End users may not know it, but it wouldn't surprise me if most PDF's out there are generated with tools not sold by Adobe (not only iText, but also e.g. pdflatex and things like that).
CNN International isn't bad. Last week I was in the US, and the difference with the US CNN is like day and night. The news on CNN International looks like a regular European news channel (or at least Western European news channel, I have no experience with Eastern European news channels so I can't say anything about those).
The US version of CNN is much more sensationalist/agitated/excited imho. And almost completely US-focussed, it seems.