That would depend on the terms of the license and what rights it conferred.
35 U.S.C. 261 says that for the purpose of assignation, patents are to be treated like personal property. Therefore, any and all rights, including the right to sue for infringement, can be assigned to a third party.
Being a license means that UC probably retained certain rights, and limited Eolas' rights to certain uses.
The University of California owns the patent and licenses it to Eolas. I wouldn't be surprised if UC wasn't helping foot the bill for the litigation and will receive a chunk of the reward as well.
What we have here (the OP) is someone who can read the Constitution, but not the Supreme Court opinions interpretting it. There are many allowable limits on the First Amendment. Depending on the type of limit, it has to pass a certain type of test to be valid. Political speech is generally very strongly protected by the court. Most of the campaign finance laws deal with reporting requirements rather than flat out speech restrictions. Also, limiting the amount of money you can donate does not prohibit your speech. You still have many avenues you can use to support your candidate or to speak out. Also, it's arguably a "content-neutral" regulation, thus subject to a lower level of scrutiny than a regulation based on the content of the speech. (Or maybe "viewpoint-neutral" but "content-based")
Anyway, while there have been a few (and very few) justices on the Supreme Court which hold the "no law abridging the freedom speech" to be very literate and limit to very few exceptions (such as slander, libel, "fighting-words"). Justice Kennedy is a strong supporter of this view of the First Amendment. However, he doesn't have incredible support for it on the court.
Even many of the "Framers" who wrote the Constitution and the First Amendment passed a law early in Congress severely limiting Freedom of Speech, even political speech. This suggests that they did not see the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech as an absolute by any means.
In closing; don't bother arguing with an absolutist.
Re:How to privatize the manned space
on
NASA's New Shuttle
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
If privatized space exploration is feasible, shouldn't it work on its own with government internvention (i.e. tax credits?) If we still have to subsidize it, what's the advantage?
Actually, that's exactly how IE functions as well; so while you claim it's a "new modality," it's actually the modality that the majority of computer users will be the most familiar with.
I don't always agree with it, either, but it is useful.
Use Wikipedia as you would any encyclopedia in your research. It's a good starting point, a place to pick up a few general facts about a subject which can help you find other more reliable sources to dig deeper into the subject you are researching. An encyclopedia should rarely be considered the kind of source you would cite in your finished paper, instead, it's the kind of source that helped you learn the basics of your subject so you could more easily find all of your other sources.
2. WTF is the FIRE department doing with a volt/amp meter? Most (cheap) volt meters don't measure past 1000 volts AC/DC.
I imagine they have to be prepared to deal with fires or other problems caused by downed powerlines, often before the electric company shows up 5 hours later.
Well, perhaps no, but I've been reading EVERY OTHER NEWS SOURCE, and they all already reported this.
Considering that Slashdot is not a news source (with the exception of a very few limited original articles) but instead, a place to comment about the news as already published elsewhere, this should not be surprising at all.
How do we know the universe is 13.7 billion years old? It was recently discovered that the universe's expansion is accelerating as time goes by. Assuming this change in acceleration has been the case all along, doesn't that really fudge with the numbers we used to estimate the universe's age?
There are many ways to estimate the age of the universe, not all of which involve calculating the expansion of the universe.
Yes, and in that free market, the employee exercised his freedom to contract by agreeing that he would be employed with Microsoft pursuant to a non-compete agreement. In return for signing such agreement, he arguably received more compensation. He had the freedom to not sign the agreement, but he would probably either not have been hired or have been paid significantly less.
That's quite an assumption really; while it could be argued that a veto in the face of a guaranteed override would make quite the statement, it could also send the message that the president is out of touch with the rest of the country. That said, I don't know by what margin any of these laws passed.
Anyway, I said "entirely responsible," meaning that, of course, the President bears some responsibility for every law he/she signs, and has more power than any one individual person in Congress in that respect, but the President does not have more power (legislatively) than Congress.
In 1978, Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts, with John Adams then being the President; however, since when were presidents entirely responsible for Acts of Congress?
We tried that, but then the city sunk. I think the problem wasn't "building the city below sea level"; the problem was messing around with the Mississippi River and the lake next door.
I think I once heard that they simply multiplied the actual Watt ratings for the speakers by the number of speakers. So a pair of 10W computer speakers would be 10W * 10W * 2 = 200 MarketingWatts!
That's correct. If people bothered to read the box, they would know that too. From Logitech's website:
Logitech® Z-5500 Digital (500 Watts) Total RMS power: 505 watts RMS Satellites: 317 watts RMS (2 x 62 W front, 2 x 62 rear, 69 W center) Subwoofer: 188 watts RMS
As soon as you live in an area with a 0% chance of needing FEMA aid anytime in the future, you can exempt yourself from these payments.
I imagine there are a limited number of places in the United States where this is true.
Besides, you have to pretty naive to think that knocking out the entire economy of a large port city for several weeks/months won't impact you. It benefits us all to help these people back on their feet.
Unless you actually like seeing unemployment skyrocket.
Slashdot Mirror
They used to have followups more frequently, in stories known as "Slashback." They're a rare occurrence anymore.
Except that even if you do X, they could still do Y. In this case, they're saying that if you do X, we'll give up our right to do Y to you.
That would depend on the terms of the license and what rights it conferred.
35 U.S.C. 261 says that for the purpose of assignation, patents are to be treated like personal property. Therefore, any and all rights, including the right to sue for infringement, can be assigned to a third party.
Being a license means that UC probably retained certain rights, and limited Eolas' rights to certain uses.
The University of California owns the patent and licenses it to Eolas. I wouldn't be surprised if UC wasn't helping foot the bill for the litigation and will receive a chunk of the reward as well.
If it comes off that easily
If you call four hours of fighting "that easily," then maybe.
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2140
Of course, how many pot smokers do you know that just give up and quit?
What we have here (the OP) is someone who can read the Constitution, but not the Supreme Court opinions interpretting it. There are many allowable limits on the First Amendment. Depending on the type of limit, it has to pass a certain type of test to be valid. Political speech is generally very strongly protected by the court. Most of the campaign finance laws deal with reporting requirements rather than flat out speech restrictions. Also, limiting the amount of money you can donate does not prohibit your speech. You still have many avenues you can use to support your candidate or to speak out. Also, it's arguably a "content-neutral" regulation, thus subject to a lower level of scrutiny than a regulation based on the content of the speech. (Or maybe "viewpoint-neutral" but "content-based")
Anyway, while there have been a few (and very few) justices on the Supreme Court which hold the "no law abridging the freedom speech" to be very literate and limit to very few exceptions (such as slander, libel, "fighting-words"). Justice Kennedy is a strong supporter of this view of the First Amendment. However, he doesn't have incredible support for it on the court.
Even many of the "Framers" who wrote the Constitution and the First Amendment passed a law early in Congress severely limiting Freedom of Speech, even political speech. This suggests that they did not see the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech as an absolute by any means.
In closing; don't bother arguing with an absolutist.
If privatized space exploration is feasible, shouldn't it work on its own with government internvention (i.e. tax credits?) If we still have to subsidize it, what's the advantage?
Public subsidization for private profits?
Actually, that's exactly how IE functions as well; so while you claim it's a "new modality," it's actually the modality that the majority of computer users will be the most familiar with.
I don't always agree with it, either, but it is useful.
Use Wikipedia as you would any encyclopedia in your research. It's a good starting point, a place to pick up a few general facts about a subject which can help you find other more reliable sources to dig deeper into the subject you are researching. An encyclopedia should rarely be considered the kind of source you would cite in your finished paper, instead, it's the kind of source that helped you learn the basics of your subject so you could more easily find all of your other sources.
Exactly, you get enough idiots in a row on Wikipedia and you can get something blatantly false into an article as a result of "consensus."
This would mean something if the "artist" actually owned the rights to the music.
2. WTF is the FIRE department doing with a volt/amp meter? Most (cheap) volt meters don't measure past 1000 volts AC/DC.
I imagine they have to be prepared to deal with fires or other problems caused by downed powerlines, often before the electric company shows up 5 hours later.
http://the.standard.net.au/articles/2005/09/16/112 6750111141.html
Well, perhaps no, but I've been reading EVERY OTHER NEWS SOURCE, and they all already reported this.
Considering that Slashdot is not a news source (with the exception of a very few limited original articles) but instead, a place to comment about the news as already published elsewhere, this should not be surprising at all.
How do we know the universe is 13.7 billion years old? It was recently discovered that the universe's expansion is accelerating as time goes by. Assuming this change in acceleration has been the case all along, doesn't that really fudge with the numbers we used to estimate the universe's age?
There are many ways to estimate the age of the universe, not all of which involve calculating the expansion of the universe.
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/age.html
This is called the FREE MARKET!
Yes, and in that free market, the employee exercised his freedom to contract by agreeing that he would be employed with Microsoft pursuant to a non-compete agreement. In return for signing such agreement, he arguably received more compensation. He had the freedom to not sign the agreement, but he would probably either not have been hired or have been paid significantly less.
It's Trademark law, it doesn't necessarily matter how much intelligence it took to come up with the name.
That's quite an assumption really; while it could be argued that a veto in the face of a guaranteed override would make quite the statement, it could also send the message that the president is out of touch with the rest of the country. That said, I don't know by what margin any of these laws passed.
Anyway, I said "entirely responsible," meaning that, of course, the President bears some responsibility for every law he/she signs, and has more power than any one individual person in Congress in that respect, but the President does not have more power (legislatively) than Congress.
In 1978, Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts, with John Adams then being the President; however, since when were presidents entirely responsible for Acts of Congress?
Some people don't appreciate the huge amount of goods that move through our rivers here in the United States.
The Ohio River alone handles 275 million tons of Cargo per year (more than the Panama Canal).
Like, building a populous city below sea level.
We tried that, but then the city sunk. I think the problem wasn't "building the city below sea level"; the problem was messing around with the Mississippi River and the lake next door.
I think I once heard that they simply multiplied the actual Watt ratings for the speakers by the number of speakers. So a pair of 10W computer speakers would be 10W * 10W * 2 = 200 MarketingWatts!
That's correct. If people bothered to read the box, they would know that too. From Logitech's website:
Logitech® Z-5500 Digital (500 Watts)
Total RMS power: 505 watts RMS
Satellites: 317 watts RMS (2 x 62 W front, 2 x 62 rear, 69 W center)
Subwoofer: 188 watts RMS
As soon as you live in an area with a 0% chance of needing FEMA aid anytime in the future, you can exempt yourself from these payments.
I imagine there are a limited number of places in the United States where this is true.
Besides, you have to pretty naive to think that knocking out the entire economy of a large port city for several weeks/months won't impact you. It benefits us all to help these people back on their feet.
Unless you actually like seeing unemployment skyrocket.
noscitur a sociis - the other options listed are embedded style devices, with nothing in common with a laptop.
Plus, it clearly says "Non-PC Product or any embedded or device versions of the above operating systems."
A laptop is a Personal Computer; they use full, standalone versions of the above operating systems, not embedded or device versions.