Anything's possible in our judicial system, but in short, no. From William Heinze (patent attorney in aforementioned article here):
...even without such a formal written policy requiring disclosure, there may still be a duty to disclose relevant intellectual property rights to a standards-setting organization in which your company participates.
Looks like JEDEC didn't even really need that "confusing" and "conflicting" policy to protect themselves. And the big-can-of-whoopass-on-Rambus precedent:
...could not remain silent while an entire industry implemented the proposed standard and then, when the standards were adopted, assert that his patent covered what manufactures believed to be an open and available standard.
That's why Infineon is going for a ruling of equitable estoppel on the patents (see previous post for what this is). Their patents will still be technically valid, but they will be kept from enforcing those patents due to the fact that "their hands were not clean" when they were awarded.
The article says that Infineon is going to look for a judgement of "equitable estoppel" on the patents. Anyone wanting to know exactly what this is can go here. Quite interesting, and with a precedent.
I agree in principle, as I find new Federal laws generally about the most evil thing out there, but we have here a contract/law situation dealing not only with possibly conflicting laws in separate states (Article IV, Section 1 and maybe a touch of Section 2), but also interstate commerce (Article I, Section 8). The commerce clause has been pushed so far these days to force Federal power as to be rediculous, but this falls clearly within it. Libertarians might even go with that one if the scope were kept limited.
The only danger is that if big business got to write a national UCITA resolving law, there'd be no more safe havens. Well, there may be if states pushed the oft-forgotten 10th Amendment, but this power is quite specifically "delegated" as long as it retains a narrow scope.
Note that I'm not actually advocating a national-level UCITA as the laws in the states are, but a law to resolve conflicts and reaffirm basic rights of consumers (as well established by precedent) in interstate commerce cases.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated...
It sounds pretty absolute to me, but IIRC and IANAL, Supreme Court decisions tend to go in the direction that this is only a restriction on government, not private entities.
please realize that has been fixed, with both an explanation and apology from Microsoft.
Explanation: "Oops, that was an old EULA, in effect for years, that said we own all of your information."
Apology: "We're sorry we got caught, we'll try to hide stuff like that better in the future."
Article IV, Section 1: Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State....
It would seem that in absence of a Washington law directly contradicting the distasteful-to-Redmond portions of Maryland's law, the law in Maryland would stand.
bit of article clarification... And this is not optional boys and girls, you can't just drop Marylanders because you don't like the laws there, because the Constitution forces it. Okay, if you had a brick-and-mortar chain and decided that Maryland's laws were restrictive, you wouldn't build a business presence in that state to accept clients there -- no problem. But MS already has a Maryland business presence, so they're screwed.
Continuing:...And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
It seems that only a federal-level UCITA will solve this problem, but let's hope that consumer protection rather than rights-castration is the central point of that law. We do have a chance after the DMCA backlash, since Congressmen appear to be realizing that the people are starting to notice when Congress passes laws supporting big business at the direct expense of the people. The Internet's been a big help in that one.
And I'm sure totally unenforceable. What's next, terms of service on TV shows?
"By watching this show, you agree not to tape it or use TiVo, not to tell everyone how bad it sucks, and we will sue you if you go to the bathroom during the commercials."
Since they used the Ben-Hur chariot scene as a model in making the pod race scene, as well as watching F1 crashes to make the pod break-ups more realistic.
Even for gem quality, all they would have to do is make a deal with DeBeers to take a chunk of their back stock for the pennies it's really worth (and would cost if it hit the common market) and use it in space.
What does DeBeers care as long as it doesn't hit the common market?
Even if they price the P4 chip way low, the only way they're going to come under $1000 is to use normal-performance components.
The P4 is stuck with RAMBUS RAM, so that jacks up the cost, and for under $1K you're only getting PC600 RDRAM. Since the P4's only advantage is in high-bandwidth applications, choking the RAM is going to make a slow computer, even on optimized apps. Just get a DDR Athlon if you're going to get a sub $1K system. Don't bother with a P4 unless you're getting a $2K-plus system and have the optimized software.
I've never heard of a death on the Mir. James Oberg has cataloged what is known about the several deaths of Russian cosmonauts here, and Mir isn't mentioned once.
It is a money problem, since both would require a tremendous amount of fuel, probably more than Russia had money for (both getting the fuel and getting it up there). Check Jim Oberg's site about the impracticability of launching things into the sun.
Okay, on-topic for that moderator:
Concept-wise: Grunts already have enough to watch out for. The last thing you need when you suddenly notice an enemy in the bushes and are trying to stalk him quietly, is some asshole blaring "Hey man, see anything out there?" over the radio. Any lapse in concentration could kill you, so they'd also better have a quick mute switch on that thing.
Ask for a "Coke" in Pizza Hut (with their fat Pepsi contract). They are, by policy, supposed to say something to the effect of "We don't have Coke, will Pepsi be okay"?
You can use any of these in informal writing and talking, but you can't sell generic cotton-tipped-swabs and call them "Q-Tips." Or Vaseline, Band-Aids, KY, or Hoovers (in England, generic for vacuum).
But all this doesn't apply to SSH since that is the name of the product as given out freely way back when.
IANAL, but I act like one sometimes. Just a serious study of Congress & Constitution:
What would happen if a Senator (or CongressCritter) read DeCSS out loud on the floor of the Senate or House?
A congressman or senator cannot be held legally accountable for anything said on the floor (an old rule to encourage open debate without fear of legal action), so could not be busted for distributing a circumvention tool.
Would it then be a matter of Public Record?
That's where it gets interesting. It would then be a part of the Congressional Record and available to the public. I don't know if there is any method for striking passages before release, but there probably is.
You should have seen it when it only had 4 MB RAM.
Rendering on the host is much better choice.
And so I finally convinced my new employer to at least buy a host-based RIP. Things are much nicer now and big files crunch really fast. If only they would upgrade their hub to 100Mbps so it doesn't take forever for GB files to get over the network to the RIP.
PostScript vectors are rendered... one-pixel accurate.
You set curve flatness in the creating program or let the RIP choose its default according to resolution. A flatness of one pixel on on this thing could kill many RIPs if they were processing this for high-resolution (3600+dpi) film. A flatness of 1 on a probably 720dpi wide format printer isn't much of a problem for a good RIP.
Most plotters nowdays are wide-format inkjets with the same raster backend as other printers.
Our 3-year-old wide format printer (you're correct, it's a really big inkjet) has an internal rasterizer with 32MB RAM and it can take a day to output a complex file. But complex 1GB+ PS files with the separate workstation RIP are no problem. This thing should only take minutes, not hours, to RIP. Depending on ink, size and quality settings, maybe an hour to print.
Methinks the service bureau used a wide format with an internal rasterizer, and that's pretty pathetic for a commercial SB. Maybe it was someplace that's only used to outputting architectural drawings, which don't get quite this complicated?
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder if that holds any water
Anything's possible in our judicial system, but in short, no. From William Heinze (patent attorney in aforementioned article here):
Looks like JEDEC didn't even really need that "confusing" and "conflicting" policy to protect themselves. And the big-can-of-whoopass-on-Rambus precedent:
Dude's patent was declared unenforceable.
That's why Infineon is going for a ruling of equitable estoppel on the patents (see previous post for what this is). Their patents will still be technically valid, but they will be kept from enforcing those patents due to the fact that "their hands were not clean" when they were awarded.
If it were a criminal charge it would be "People (or something like that) vs. Rambus," not "Infineon vs. Rambus" as it is.
The article says that Infineon is going to look for a judgement of "equitable estoppel" on the patents. Anyone wanting to know exactly what this is can go here. Quite interesting, and with a precedent.
I agree in principle, as I find new Federal laws generally about the most evil thing out there, but we have here a contract/law situation dealing not only with possibly conflicting laws in separate states (Article IV, Section 1 and maybe a touch of Section 2), but also interstate commerce (Article I, Section 8). The commerce clause has been pushed so far these days to force Federal power as to be rediculous, but this falls clearly within it. Libertarians might even go with that one if the scope were kept limited.
The only danger is that if big business got to write a national UCITA resolving law, there'd be no more safe havens. Well, there may be if states pushed the oft-forgotten 10th Amendment, but this power is quite specifically "delegated" as long as it retains a narrow scope.
Note that I'm not actually advocating a national-level UCITA as the laws in the states are, but a law to resolve conflicts and reaffirm basic rights of consumers (as well established by precedent) in interstate commerce cases.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated...
It sounds pretty absolute to me, but IIRC and IANAL, Supreme Court decisions tend to go in the direction that this is only a restriction on government, not private entities.
Besides, to MS, any search is reasonable.
Watch out, you may get sued.
please realize that has been fixed, with both an explanation and apology from Microsoft.
Explanation: "Oops, that was an old EULA, in effect for years, that said we own all of your information."
Apology: "We're sorry we got caught, we'll try to hide stuff like that better in the future."
Article IV, Section 1: Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State....
It would seem that in absence of a Washington law directly contradicting the distasteful-to-Redmond portions of Maryland's law, the law in Maryland would stand.
bit of article clarification... And this is not optional boys and girls, you can't just drop Marylanders because you don't like the laws there, because the Constitution forces it. Okay, if you had a brick-and-mortar chain and decided that Maryland's laws were restrictive, you wouldn't build a business presence in that state to accept clients there -- no problem. But MS already has a Maryland business presence, so they're screwed.
Continuing: ...And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
It seems that only a federal-level UCITA will solve this problem, but let's hope that consumer protection rather than rights-castration is the central point of that law. We do have a chance after the DMCA backlash, since Congressmen appear to be realizing that the people are starting to notice when Congress passes laws supporting big business at the direct expense of the people. The Internet's been a big help in that one.
Since they used the Ben-Hur chariot scene as a model in making the pod race scene, as well as watching F1 crashes to make the pod break-ups more realistic.
Even for gem quality, all they would have to do is make a deal with DeBeers to take a chunk of their back stock for the pennies it's really worth (and would cost if it hit the common market) and use it in space.
What does DeBeers care as long as it doesn't hit the common market?
Even if they price the P4 chip way low, the only way they're going to come under $1000 is to use normal-performance components.
The P4 is stuck with RAMBUS RAM, so that jacks up the cost, and for under $1K you're only getting PC600 RDRAM. Since the P4's only advantage is in high-bandwidth applications, choking the RAM is going to make a slow computer, even on optimized apps. Just get a DDR Athlon if you're going to get a sub $1K system. Don't bother with a P4 unless you're getting a $2K-plus system and have the optimized software.
Tom's has a good one on this
Who holds American citizens abroad against their will and the will of the US Government? Only three classes I can think of:
The first two don't apply, but the last certainly does, and the gain is international prestige with mud on the US's face.
I thought we didn't negotiate with terrorists, no matter how big their organization?
Sands Missile Range Museum are a few hours away. Both have some appeal
But not the missile range itself. I spent a few weeks there and that place SUCKS!
Yecch, and that was for "Dances with Wolves," what a piece of crap along with his other directorial trials, like Postman and Waterworld.
The only thing he was really good in was A Perfect World (with "Unforgiven" Clint Eastwood directing, now there was a deserved Oscar).
I've never heard of a death on the Mir. James Oberg has cataloged what is known about the several deaths of Russian cosmonauts here, and Mir isn't mentioned once.
It is a money problem, since both would require a tremendous amount of fuel, probably more than Russia had money for (both getting the fuel and getting it up there). Check Jim Oberg's site about the impracticability of launching things into the sun.
Alert: Humor-impaired moderation in the area.
Okay, on-topic for that moderator: Concept-wise: Grunts already have enough to watch out for. The last thing you need when you suddenly notice an enemy in the bushes and are trying to stalk him quietly, is some asshole blaring "Hey man, see anything out there?" over the radio. Any lapse in concentration could kill you, so they'd also better have a quick mute switch on that thing.
Ask for a "Coke" in Pizza Hut (with their fat Pepsi contract). They are, by policy, supposed to say something to the effect of "We don't have Coke, will Pepsi be okay"?
You can use any of these in informal writing and talking, but you can't sell generic cotton-tipped-swabs and call them "Q-Tips." Or Vaseline, Band-Aids, KY, or Hoovers (in England, generic for vacuum).
But all this doesn't apply to SSH since that is the name of the product as given out freely way back when.
IANAL, but I act like one sometimes. Just a serious study of Congress & Constitution:
What would happen if a Senator (or CongressCritter) read DeCSS out loud on the floor of the Senate or House?
A congressman or senator cannot be held legally accountable for anything said on the floor (an old rule to encourage open debate without fear of legal action), so could not be busted for distributing a circumvention tool.
Would it then be a matter of Public Record?
That's where it gets interesting. It would then be a part of the Congressional Record and available to the public. I don't know if there is any method for striking passages before release, but there probably is.
How about running cables by pet ferret? Costs only a few treats.
I could contract my three out to some IT companies and make a bundle.
So it will have to render in bands.
You should have seen it when it only had 4 MB RAM.
Rendering on the host is much better choice.
And so I finally convinced my new employer to at least buy a host-based RIP. Things are much nicer now and big files crunch really fast. If only they would upgrade their hub to 100Mbps so it doesn't take forever for GB files to get over the network to the RIP.
PostScript vectors are rendered ... one-pixel accurate.
You set curve flatness in the creating program or let the RIP choose its default according to resolution. A flatness of one pixel on on this thing could kill many RIPs if they were processing this for high-resolution (3600+dpi) film. A flatness of 1 on a probably 720dpi wide format printer isn't much of a problem for a good RIP.
Most plotters nowdays are wide-format inkjets with the same raster backend as other printers.
Our 3-year-old wide format printer (you're correct, it's a really big inkjet) has an internal rasterizer with 32MB RAM and it can take a day to output a complex file. But complex 1GB+ PS files with the separate workstation RIP are no problem. This thing should only take minutes, not hours, to RIP. Depending on ink, size and quality settings, maybe an hour to print.
Methinks the service bureau used a wide format with an internal rasterizer, and that's pretty pathetic for a commercial SB. Maybe it was someplace that's only used to outputting architectural drawings, which don't get quite this complicated?
TIFF would just be the rasterized data. You're just moving the processing from the printer to the workstation producing the TIFF.