Honeywell can easily take the position that the patents in question are not prior art (different subject matter) and thus don't need to be disclosed.
If you look at the claims it is not at all convincing that they are prior art. In some cases some the of patents Nest is claiming were hidden from the USPTO are actually cited in the patents that Honeywell is claiming are infringed on (OOPS).
That's absolutely wrong. Patent examiners generally have a set of patents and some literature in the field they review that they feel covers the key points in the art that they refer to in examining patents. They will also add to that the patents in the field held by the filing company because those patents are important in establishing the expertise of the inventor in field.
Now what is true is that the examiner won't have a complete view of the literature, but these days there is so much crap published that it is impossible for any individual to possess that knowledge. That's one of the reasons trials are so expensive. Generally that's when the most complete prior art reviews are done.
Most of these claims by Nest are poppycock. For example in US 7,634,504 is cited 5,065,813 which NEST claims was not shown to the PTO by Honeywell.
Another example is 7,634,504,
1. A method comprising the steps of: operating a programmable controller to cause an HVAC system to change an environmental condition of an inside space from a first initial set point to a second desired set point, the HVAC system achieving the change in the environmental condition to the second desired set point in an amount of time; and providing a message during the amount of time indicating when the desired second set point is anticipated to be achieved in the inside space.
is preceded by
1. A method for preheating an oven having a control system to operate the oven, input means for setting cooking parameters, and means for displaying a time remaining until a preheat cycle is complete, the method comprising the steps of:
selecting a preheat temperature using the input means for setting cooking parameters;
providing a preheat time by using the control system of the oven;
determining if the oven cavity is pre-conditioned, wherein the oven cavity is pre-conditioned when a temperature in the oven is greater than a predetermined temperature and the predetermined temperature is greater than a room temperature and less than the preheat temperature;
executing a preheat cycle when the oven cavity is not pre-conditioned;
displaying the preheat time in a decrementing fashion using the display means of the oven;
ending the preheat cycle when the decrementing preheat time equals zero; and accessing a look-up table to provide a preheat time.
Clearly his patent attorneys didn't get the meaning of the word comprising across in their discussion, or the guy just wants to make a grandstand show here.
Many individual health decisions affect not only the person making the decision, but also people NOT making the decision. Vaccines depend on a certain percentage of the population (say 95%) of the population to prevent the disease from spreading to those who for health reasons could not take the vaccine, or for those whose immune systems reacted in such a way as to make the vaccine ineffective.
If YOUR decision only affects YOU I don't care. But it affects others too, and that's when you lose the right to make it on your own.
Yes. For example a world-wide effort to eradicate polio is stymied by Islamic fundamentalists in Nigeria who spreading a rumor that the shots are really intended to sterilize male children.
There is a bill in the Senate that would revoke passports to those have a levy or lien filed against them by the IRS for more than $50,000 in back taxes which is not being repaid in a timely fashion.
Cell phone service is definitely an oligopoly. Oil though is controlled by a cartel of state run enterprises - Saudi Arabian Oil Company, Petroleos de Venezuala etc. The 10 largest oil companies in the world are state-owned and control something like 80% of the world's oil reserves. For comparison the Iran Oil Company holds 10 times the reserves that ExxonMobil does.
Your shopping elsewhere is probably what Best Buy wants. Margins in consumer electronics are pretty thin. Start returning stuff on a frequent schedule and they aren't making any money having you as a customer.
So if you go somewhere else to do your returns they figure they will come out ahead overall.
TFA didn't mention the fact that the restricted person had a fairly active history of returning items. Many retailers, not just BB will clamp down on serial returners.
That probably means the vast majority of Best Buy customers are unlikely to run into this issue.
Not that I would be a Best Buy customer. I'm just not a B&M kind of guy. And the few times I shopped there I didn't get a feeling that I wanted to be one of their customers. Salesmen trying to push cables that cost 25 times what I could get online are a real turn off.
Which is probably why they are heading for the.BK list.
NASA owns less than a thousand patents. I have never heard of them suing anyone for infringement. In fact it may be that under US law the US government cannot sue for infringement.
They do run a licensing office though. I imagine if they were to license someone the licensee could sue an unlicensed party.
This is just a guess though. IANAL although I do have some patent experience.
Not sure what you mean by not being able to do anything about it. SOPA hasn't been passed yet, and I think if we put the cynicism aside and continue to respond in a fashion that must seem quite surprising to the Congress the message will take hold.
Seems pretty simple. The DCMA has a clause in it regarding repeat offenders. Nothing new, it's always been there. Hosts have to do something to block repeat offenders or they lose safe harbor. Google knows about it too - they booted a bunch of music blogs for this very reason.
The problem is how the heck are they going to do that? The vernacular of the web is such that people can just establish a new account if the one they have is blocked.
It's just one of the many problems with the DCMA - a law that seemingly is quite outdated and needs a lot of rethinking.
Read the posting again. I proposed a view where socialization of applied research was bad, but fundamental research was good.
I have mixed views on the topic - over my lifetime I have seen that true socialism, that is government ownership of the means of production seldom works out well. That is a practice that is not very common in the world today.
However I am not averse to some aspects of a more expansive definitions of socialism. For example socialized medicine or government funding of fundamental research.
And for those who chose to mod down my posting - a big raspberry for using mod points to censor viewpoints that you don't agree with rather than taking the time to respond.
"project would cover an area of 52,000 square miles"
Hardly, since the bases were supposed to be spread apart by 4 miles or so. Perhaps the total would be spread out over 52,000 square miles, but surely it wouldn't actually cover anything like 52,000 square miles.
Slashdot Mirror
Honeywell can easily take the position that the patents in question are not prior art (different subject matter) and thus don't need to be disclosed.
If you look at the claims it is not at all convincing that they are prior art. In some cases some the of patents Nest is claiming were hidden from the USPTO are actually cited in the patents that Honeywell is claiming are infringed on (OOPS).
That's absolutely wrong. Patent examiners generally have a set of patents and some literature in the field they review that they feel covers the key points in the art that they refer to in examining patents. They will also add to that the patents in the field held by the filing company because those patents are important in establishing the expertise of the inventor in field.
Now what is true is that the examiner won't have a complete view of the literature, but these days there is so much crap published that it is impossible for any individual to possess that knowledge. That's one of the reasons trials are so expensive. Generally that's when the most complete prior art reviews are done.
Most of these claims by Nest are poppycock. For example in US 7,634,504 is cited 5,065,813 which NEST claims was not shown to the PTO by Honeywell.
Another example is 7,634,504,
1. A method comprising the steps of: operating a programmable controller to cause an HVAC system to change an environmental condition of an inside space from a first initial set point to a second desired set point, the HVAC system achieving the change in the environmental condition to the second desired set point in an amount of time; and providing a message during the amount of time indicating when the desired second set point is anticipated to be achieved in the inside space.
is preceded by
1. A method for preheating an oven having a control system to operate the oven, input means for setting cooking parameters, and means for displaying a time remaining until a preheat cycle is complete, the method comprising the steps of:
selecting a preheat temperature using the input means for setting cooking parameters;
providing a preheat time by using the control system of the oven;
determining if the oven cavity is pre-conditioned, wherein the oven cavity is pre-conditioned when a temperature in the oven is greater than a predetermined temperature and the predetermined temperature is greater than a room temperature and less than the preheat temperature;
executing a preheat cycle when the oven cavity is not pre-conditioned;
displaying the preheat time in a decrementing fashion using the display means of the oven;
ending the preheat cycle when the decrementing preheat time equals zero; and accessing a look-up table to provide a preheat time.
Clearly his patent attorneys didn't get the meaning of the word comprising across in their discussion, or the guy just wants to make a grandstand show here.
OK, summary execution.
Look up the concept of herd immunity. That's why you are morally wrong for not getting your child vaccinated.
Wrong.
Many individual health decisions affect not only the person making the decision, but also people NOT making the decision. Vaccines depend on a certain percentage of the population (say 95%) of the population to prevent the disease from spreading to those who for health reasons could not take the vaccine, or for those whose immune systems reacted in such a way as to make the vaccine ineffective.
If YOUR decision only affects YOU I don't care. But it affects others too, and that's when you lose the right to make it on your own.
Jenny McCarthy should be brought up on manslaughter charges.
Yes. For example a world-wide effort to eradicate polio is stymied by Islamic fundamentalists in Nigeria who spreading a rumor that the shots are really intended to sterilize male children.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15819797
Ignorance spread intentionally for political reasons has to be the most evil of all human activities.
How are they going to enter a PIN with no hands?
No, because there is no such thing in progress.
There is a bill in the Senate that would revoke passports to those have a levy or lien filed against them by the IRS for more than $50,000 in back taxes which is not being repaid in a timely fashion.
All the private contractors who were supplying airport security prior to 9/11 were fired when the government nationalized airport security.
Cell phone service is definitely an oligopoly. Oil though is controlled by a cartel of state run enterprises - Saudi Arabian Oil Company, Petroleos de Venezuala etc. The 10 largest oil companies in the world are state-owned and control something like 80% of the world's oil reserves. For comparison the Iran Oil Company holds 10 times the reserves that ExxonMobil does.
Read the original article. It states the disk was defective. Please explain to me how you can determine that it was defective without opening it.
What part of this sort did you not understand?
Your shopping elsewhere is probably what Best Buy wants. Margins in consumer electronics are pretty thin. Start returning stuff on a frequent schedule and they aren't making any money having you as a customer.
So if you go somewhere else to do your returns they figure they will come out ahead overall.
There is always that conspiracy theory that many if not most viruses are written by anti-virus software vendors.
After all we didn't have many viruses until these things appeared on the market.
I'm not one to believe this sort of conspiracy theory, but McAfee isn't doing themselves any favors by publicizing this.
TFA didn't mention the fact that the restricted person had a fairly active history of returning items. Many retailers, not just BB will clamp down on serial returners.
That probably means the vast majority of Best Buy customers are unlikely to run into this issue.
Not that I would be a Best Buy customer. I'm just not a B&M kind of guy. And the few times I shopped there I didn't get a feeling that I wanted to be one of their customers. Salesmen trying to push cables that cost 25 times what I could get online are a real turn off.
Which is probably why they are heading for the .BK list.
NASA owns less than a thousand patents. I have never heard of them suing anyone for infringement. In fact it may be that under US law the US government cannot sue for infringement.
They do run a licensing office though. I imagine if they were to license someone the licensee could sue an unlicensed party.
This is just a guess though. IANAL although I do have some patent experience.
Most people are smart enough to live in a place where water is easily available.
Not sure what you mean by not being able to do anything about it. SOPA hasn't been passed yet, and I think if we put the cynicism aside and continue to respond in a fashion that must seem quite surprising to the Congress the message will take hold.
Seems pretty simple. The DCMA has a clause in it regarding repeat offenders. Nothing new, it's always been there. Hosts have to do something to block repeat offenders or they lose safe harbor. Google knows about it too - they booted a bunch of music blogs for this very reason.
The problem is how the heck are they going to do that? The vernacular of the web is such that people can just establish a new account if the one they have is blocked.
It's just one of the many problems with the DCMA - a law that seemingly is quite outdated and needs a lot of rethinking.
Read the posting again. I proposed a view where socialization of applied research was bad, but fundamental research was good.
I have mixed views on the topic - over my lifetime I have seen that true socialism, that is government ownership of the means of production seldom works out well. That is a practice that is not very common in the world today.
However I am not averse to some aspects of a more expansive definitions of socialism. For example socialized medicine or government funding of fundamental research.
And for those who chose to mod down my posting - a big raspberry for using mod points to censor viewpoints that you don't agree with rather than taking the time to respond.
"project would cover an area of 52,000 square miles"
Hardly, since the bases were supposed to be spread apart by 4 miles or so. Perhaps the total would be spread out over 52,000 square miles, but surely it wouldn't actually cover anything like 52,000 square miles.
You have to remember that Nathan Myrvold is the founder of Intellectual Ventures, perhaps the biggest patent troll of all.
And that Bill Gates is the uber copyright troll, the prime sponsor of for pay software for PCs.
http://www.digibarn.com/collections/newsletters/homebrew/V2_01/homebrew_V2_01_p2.jpg
LOL. AOL is the BIGGEST destructor of shareholder value I can think of. The Time Warner AOL merger wiped out billion after billion of capital.
The only thing this does is unlock a billion dollars to be used for executive bonuses and golden parachutes for when AOL finally is buried.