If the claimant truly possessed the powers which he claimed, there would be no need for him to delegate protection of his rights to those Powers to the Patent Office. Combined with omniscience which would allow the claimant to know when his rights were being infringed, a large thunderbolt would be an effective enforcement method, and much quicker than the courts of then Eastern District of Texas,
It's not a matter of public interest. In this case it can be argued that the injunction conflicts with Freedom of Expression. Essentially the injunction brings into play where the balance between a right to Privacy and Freedom of Expression lie.
The European Convention on Human Rights gives states a wide "margin of appreciation" on where they may place the dividing line. For example, should the US ever become a signatory, it could legitimately claim compliance with the convention even though Freedom of Speech is regarded as a more important right than Privacy. In France, on the other hand, more importance is given to privacy. As long as both rights are protected to some extent, both nations would be regarded as compliant in terms of their implementation.
Censoring the Web is fraught with difficulty and could be challenged under those same rights.
When the UK implemented its Human Rights Act, which effectively ratified the ECHR in the UK, it was openly stated by Parliament that a high threshold would be required for matters of Privacy to overcome matters of Free Speech, i.e. Parliament wanted a Human Rights implementation closer to the US than France. Unfortunately, legal rulings have been quietly lowering the bar in clear contravention of this intention.
Having business interests in the UK is not the same as the UK having jurisdiction over a company or person. The mere fact that twitter trades with UK citizens does not (necessarily) give the UK jurisdiction. Dealings with Twitter are presumably carried out under US law (or to be more specific, whichever state Twitter has headquarters/ a significant office in)
See the recent George Hotz case for an example of whether the courts have jurisdiction over the case (Mr Hotz claimed he had minimal association with California and couldn't be sued there).
Similarly, unless Twitter has a significant UK office, it is governed by US law and not UK law. (I agree it is not always as black and white as this) Twitter has simply stated that they will comply with legally valid requests, but they may be well within their rights to contest the validity of the request as the reason the information is sought is not an offence in the US.
Hmm, man walks out of bathroom after having showered only to find someone in his room who may or may not be the maid.
Could he have not thought she was a burglar or simply have being trying to force her out of the room whilst he got dressed?
(Hey if everyone else can speculate with no facts to go on, lets join in!)
With one screen you tend to automatically blow up the window you're working on to the maximum extent possible; even working on a 27" iMac with 2560x1440 pixels, it doesn't seem like enough, so I use my work laptop to hold the browser whilst the development is done on the iMac.
Yes. You're right. However, patents don't seem to work very well.
They are meant to reward inventors by giving them a temporary monopoly on their invention in exchange for full disclosure of their invention. The problem is that patents do not succeed in their purpose of dissemination. Patents are worded in a way that obscures what an invention is and how it can be applied. Some of this is deliberate and some of it because of the way patents have to be phrased.
In this case for example, it is likely that Woz thought of the idea and re-invented it entirely from scratch before RCA came round and went "ahem! we have a patent. Give us some royalties.". The problem is that Woz couldn't prove he came up with the idea himself and had to open Apples cheque book to RCA.
Macro and micro evolution are the same thing on different time scales, and if one works, the other has to.
By this logic if I can walk from my house to the store, I should be able to walk from Boston to London. They're just at different scales!
Well, there are people who have walked across America and other continents, so the distance is not a problem. You're only making it more difficult/impossible by adding water, whereas the original argument does not have any significant hurdles to overcome.
It's my impression that Branson has taken over the sponsorship/ funding and involvement for a project called Deep Flight Challenger started by Steve Fossett (Rest In Pieces)
I'm still trying to work out if the sub will actually have a large see through dome, or whether that will be replaced by some other material and rely on cameras for external visibility. If it is going to have a large see through area, what the hell is it made of?
"Change gear, change gear, change gear, check mirror, murder a prostitute, change gear, change gear, murder. That's a lot of effort in a day."
(/clarkson)
Slashdot Mirror
User-agent: HMRC-Spider
Disallow: /
I wonder if it will follow the rules??
For media distribution, it is getting to the point where some form of memory card may be the answer.
If the claimant truly possessed the powers which he claimed, there would be no need for him to delegate protection of his rights to those Powers to the Patent Office. Combined with omniscience which would allow the claimant to know when his rights were being infringed, a large thunderbolt would be an effective enforcement method, and much quicker than the courts of then Eastern District of Texas,
But the claimant could say he was a person having ordinary skill in the art... :-)
It may not be enough - the subscribers have a relation with the US and not the UK office, which seems to deal with advertising only
It's not a matter of public interest. In this case it can be argued that the injunction conflicts with Freedom of Expression. Essentially the injunction brings into play where the balance between a right to Privacy and Freedom of Expression lie.
The European Convention on Human Rights gives states a wide "margin of appreciation" on where they may place the dividing line. For example, should the US ever become a signatory, it could legitimately claim compliance with the convention even though Freedom of Speech is regarded as a more important right than Privacy. In France, on the other hand, more importance is given to privacy. As long as both rights are protected to some extent, both nations would be regarded as compliant in terms of their implementation.
Censoring the Web is fraught with difficulty and could be challenged under those same rights.
When the UK implemented its Human Rights Act, which effectively ratified the ECHR in the UK, it was openly stated by Parliament that a high threshold would be required for matters of Privacy to overcome matters of Free Speech, i.e. Parliament wanted a Human Rights implementation closer to the US than France. Unfortunately, legal rulings have been quietly lowering the bar in clear contravention of this intention.
Having business interests in the UK is not the same as the UK having jurisdiction over a company or person. The mere fact that twitter trades with UK citizens does not (necessarily) give the UK jurisdiction. Dealings with Twitter are presumably carried out under US law (or to be more specific, whichever state Twitter has headquarters/ a significant office in)
See the recent George Hotz case for an example of whether the courts have jurisdiction over the case (Mr Hotz claimed he had minimal association with California and couldn't be sued there).
Similarly, unless Twitter has a significant UK office, it is governed by US law and not UK law. (I agree it is not always as black and white as this) Twitter has simply stated that they will comply with legally valid requests, but they may be well within their rights to contest the validity of the request as the reason the information is sought is not an offence in the US.
Hmm, man walks out of bathroom after having showered only to find someone in his room who may or may not be the maid. Could he have not thought she was a burglar or simply have being trying to force her out of the room whilst he got dressed? (Hey if everyone else can speculate with no facts to go on, lets join in!)
...he just registered on /. when he was 6
I suppose if you fired a canister of popcorn up, it could target and cook it to perfection by the time it came down.
With one screen you tend to automatically blow up the window you're working on to the maximum extent possible; even working on a 27" iMac with 2560x1440 pixels, it doesn't seem like enough, so I use my work laptop to hold the browser whilst the development is done on the iMac.
I watch 3 porn movies at once, one on each monitor. It is like an orgy on my desk.
I hope you wipe the desk and monitors clean afterwards...
Yes. You're right. However, patents don't seem to work very well. They are meant to reward inventors by giving them a temporary monopoly on their invention in exchange for full disclosure of their invention. The problem is that patents do not succeed in their purpose of dissemination. Patents are worded in a way that obscures what an invention is and how it can be applied. Some of this is deliberate and some of it because of the way patents have to be phrased. In this case for example, it is likely that Woz thought of the idea and re-invented it entirely from scratch before RCA came round and went "ahem! we have a patent. Give us some royalties.". The problem is that Woz couldn't prove he came up with the idea himself and had to open Apples cheque book to RCA.
is alive and well here
from 1968 -.they want their Monolith with rounded corners back
Party on, dudes!
Why choose space commanders for underwater battles? Anyway, Bean claims he was the brains behind the outfit.
Macro and micro evolution are the same thing on different time scales, and if one works, the other has to.
By this logic if I can walk from my house to the store, I should be able to walk from Boston to London. They're just at different scales!
Well, there are people who have walked across America and other continents, so the distance is not a problem. You're only making it more difficult/impossible by adding water, whereas the original argument does not have any significant hurdles to overcome.
Any word on how well Kiano Reeves does at this game?
How would Sean Connery or Jürgen Prochnow do? (or Clark Gable/Burt Lancaster or John Mills or....)
Strawberry sex is kinda meh to me though.
You forgot the whipped cream ;-)
It's my impression that Branson has taken over the sponsorship/ funding and involvement for a project called Deep Flight Challenger started by Steve Fossett (Rest In Pieces) I'm still trying to work out if the sub will actually have a large see through dome, or whether that will be replaced by some other material and rely on cameras for external visibility. If it is going to have a large see through area, what the hell is it made of?
"Change gear, change gear, change gear, check mirror, murder a prostitute, change gear, change gear, murder. That's a lot of effort in a day." (/clarkson)
OK, but can I add Georgia Moffet too? Damn too late, Tennant saw her first :-(
..with some Lalla Ward and you won't want to get out of your bunk for weeks
If you're going to drop an iPhone 1000 feet, aim for a bush.
handy life tip: just aim for the bush
But what if the bush has been removed?