Lately, I'm often confused about the entire war over "intellectual property", as it applies to things from newsgroup postings to open-source code to an idea you talked about with your wife over coffee.
As I see it, patents are there so that an inventor can design something new and unique, and not have to worry about getting the credit for his work stolen.
For the world of media, we have copyright and trademark laws. Patents, however, are slightly different as I understand them. To get a patent, you need to have something physical, not just an idea.
Apparently now, if I take an idea I have for, say, a flying car - I design it, I build a prototype, and I want to sell it to people. However, I know that Ford Motors can produce and sell it more efficiently, and use my own ideas to put me out of business. So I take my prototype to the patent office, and I patent it. That way, if Ford DOES come out with flying cars based off my design, I can say "Ahem, look. I patented this, it's legal and official, let's have our lawyers talk."
I'm not certain if that's exactly how the letter of the law reads, but I'm pretty sure it's the gist of it.
ObTechie: If I have a wondrous idea on how to make firewall software more efficient and successful, and I post it on alt.tech-support - then some company goes and releases a "New-and-improved" firewall program that uses my concepts, have I been robbed?
Perhaps by the concept of "intellectual property", yes I have. But morally and ethically, no. If I had a plan for this program, but didn't do anything with it (copyright it, trademark it, or patent it - whichever applies to software), and I told everyone about it, then it's my screw-up for giving away the secret.
It's just like finding a gold mine on unowned land. You'd better buy the mineral rights to the land before going to the bar and bragging about your discovery.
Personally, in this day of new technology popping up left and right, and especially in the cutthroat market we have, more people need to understand the patent system, and the rights they have to their inventions.
Personally, I think the concern over this is unjustified. No one's rights are violated by simple surveillance. You aren't being oppressed by having your name in a database or on a list. Just being watched deprives you of nothing.
Yes, there will be kids that use this as a way to get "revenge" on the others who piss them off. Guess what? It's been happening for years. It's called being a "tattle-tale", and we've ALL done it, since kindergarten.
Look at it in another light. If you have the ability to stop a crime before it happens, and the police bust down a drug dealer's door before he's made the sale, are said dealer's rights violated? Go ahead. Say yes.
There's no harm in being watched. No reason to worry, unless you're actually doing something wrong, am I right? And if you are, then you get caught. It's the way the system works, it's the way it should work.
Rewards? That I disagree with. Keeping order should be its own reward.
This comes in handy for the RP-ers who have to commute to get their groups together to play. Instead, one could now just program the adventure, distribute it via CD-ROM, and network.
No substitute for pencil-and-paper, though. Or dice-throwing.
Wonder if they can open-source that into the game...
Okay, from a layman's perspective, let me see if I get this:
-Buckyballs are molecules composed (usually) of 60 carbon atoms, linked together to form a soccerball-like shape.
-They're damn strong and resilient.
-You can store smaller molecules inside them.
Okay, my question is - if we could mass-produce these, what kinds of products could Joe Consumer expect to see featuring buckyball "technology"?
-Literally "puncture-proof" tires -lightweight protective vests for police and military use. If these things are as light as one would assume, they'd be more effective than current Kevlar. -A buckyball-silicon mix that could be formed into glass-like structures, lightweight and superstrong for use in construction.
Maybe I'm off-base, but it seems like the benefits of this discovery may be one of the biggest revolutions to hit the economic community in a long while.
Could someone patent buckyball-making technology, or the process involved in creating them? Seems like another anti-trust lawsuit waiting to happen.
I see. Yikes. With 40 Bills on my desk that day, I neglected to check all the numbers. Yes, it was the research committee that was voted down, mostly because the State Senate wasn't willing to shell out $13,500 for something they don't fully understand.
As I understand it, and feel free to correct me here, the law won't go into effect until December 1, 2000; and can be repealed after that, or stricken by Committee before. So we've got about 9 months to lobby and litigate against UCITA, as I see it.
Letter-writing campaigns, calls to Congressmen and Representatives, especially for those living in VA; that's what's needed here to protect the rights of software users. With proper legislation, I'm certain some compromise can be reached.
Working in a law office in Arlington has its advantages. Anyone can back up this information on the bills by going to http://legis.state.va.us , and checking BILL STATUS on HJ277, SJ239, and SJ239S1. Basically, it goes as this: On 1/24, House Joint Resolution 277 was printed and referred to the Committee on Rules, who reviewed the proposed bill. On 2/11, the Committee voted UNANIMOUSLY, 17-0, to have the bill stricken from the docket. That means it was removed from consideration. No go. Taken down, shitcanned, out of the park, ejected, exiled, no longer applicable. Despite Infoworld's reports, UCITA has NOT passed into law, and if the Committee on Rules is any indication, won't for a while. ~Matt
Slashdot Mirror
Lately, I'm often confused about the entire war over "intellectual property", as it applies to things from newsgroup postings to open-source code to an idea you talked about with your wife over coffee.
As I see it, patents are there so that an inventor can design something new and unique, and not have to worry about getting the credit for his work stolen.
For the world of media, we have copyright and trademark laws. Patents, however, are slightly different as I understand them. To get a patent, you need to have something physical, not just an idea.
Apparently now, if I take an idea I have for, say, a flying car - I design it, I build a prototype, and I want to sell it to people. However, I know that Ford Motors can produce and sell it more efficiently, and use my own ideas to put me out of business. So I take my prototype to the patent office, and I patent it. That way, if Ford DOES come out with flying cars based off my design, I can say "Ahem, look. I patented this, it's legal and official, let's have our lawyers talk."
I'm not certain if that's exactly how the letter of the law reads, but I'm pretty sure it's the gist of it.
ObTechie: If I have a wondrous idea on how to make firewall software more efficient and successful, and I post it on alt.tech-support - then some company goes and releases a "New-and-improved" firewall program that uses my concepts, have I been robbed?
Perhaps by the concept of "intellectual property", yes I have. But morally and ethically, no. If I had a plan for this program, but didn't do anything with it (copyright it, trademark it, or patent it - whichever applies to software), and I told everyone about it, then it's my screw-up for giving away the secret.
It's just like finding a gold mine on unowned land. You'd better buy the mineral rights to the land before going to the bar and bragging about your discovery.
Personally, in this day of new technology popping up left and right, and especially in the cutthroat market we have, more people need to understand the patent system, and the rights they have to their inventions.
Just my 2 pesos. Return with interest.
~Matt
Yes, there will be kids that use this as a way to get "revenge" on the others who piss them off. Guess what? It's been happening for years. It's called being a "tattle-tale", and we've ALL done it, since kindergarten.
Look at it in another light. If you have the ability to stop a crime before it happens, and the police bust down a drug dealer's door before he's made the sale, are said dealer's rights violated? Go ahead. Say yes.
There's no harm in being watched. No reason to worry, unless you're actually doing something wrong, am I right? And if you are, then you get caught. It's the way the system works, it's the way it should work.
Rewards? That I disagree with. Keeping order should be its own reward.
This comes in handy for the RP-ers who have to commute to get their groups together to play. Instead, one could now just program the adventure, distribute it via CD-ROM, and network.
No substitute for pencil-and-paper, though. Or dice-throwing.
Wonder if they can open-source that into the game...
~Matt Nute
Okay, from a layman's perspective, let me see if I get this:
-Buckyballs are molecules composed (usually) of 60 carbon atoms, linked together to form a soccerball-like shape.
-They're damn strong and resilient.
-You can store smaller molecules inside them.
Okay, my question is - if we could mass-produce these, what kinds of products could Joe Consumer expect to see featuring buckyball "technology"?
-Literally "puncture-proof" tires
-lightweight protective vests for police and military use. If these things are as light as one would assume, they'd be more effective than current Kevlar.
-A buckyball-silicon mix that could be formed into glass-like structures, lightweight and superstrong for use in construction.
Maybe I'm off-base, but it seems like the benefits of this discovery may be one of the biggest revolutions to hit the economic community in a long while.
Could someone patent buckyball-making technology, or the process involved in creating them? Seems like another anti-trust lawsuit waiting to happen.
Microsoft Buckyball 2001, I can see it now...
~Matt Nute
As I understand it, and feel free to correct me here, the law won't go into effect until December 1, 2000; and can be repealed after that, or stricken by Committee before. So we've got about 9 months to lobby and litigate against UCITA, as I see it.
Letter-writing campaigns, calls to Congressmen and Representatives, especially for those living in VA; that's what's needed here to protect the rights of software users. With proper legislation, I'm certain some compromise can be reached.
~Matt Nute
Working in a law office in Arlington has its advantages. Anyone can back up this information on the bills by going to http://legis.state.va.us , and checking BILL STATUS on HJ277, SJ239, and SJ239S1. Basically, it goes as this: On 1/24, House Joint Resolution 277 was printed and referred to the Committee on Rules, who reviewed the proposed bill. On 2/11, the Committee voted UNANIMOUSLY, 17-0, to have the bill stricken from the docket. That means it was removed from consideration. No go. Taken down, shitcanned, out of the park, ejected, exiled, no longer applicable. Despite Infoworld's reports, UCITA has NOT passed into law, and if the Committee on Rules is any indication, won't for a while. ~Matt