Of course, it's not like microsoft ever changes it's APIs.
I have run into plenty of hardware (and software) that doesn't work correctly in a newer version of windows. It wouldn't be much harder for a company to say "compatible with:... Linux (2.4.19-2.4.24)." One would know that it would work within those kernals, and it might work with others, but no promises.
Ok, If it needs to be "published" in dead tree format. Then perhaps someone should start a new magazine. Published monthly, it could collect ideas online and publish them to preserve their freedom.
On the other hand, with patents if you were to very generally describe an idea, others could still patent a very specific implementation. If you were to be specific, others would just have to be specifically different. It would still be better to actually patent some of these ideas (ala IBM) for defensive use.
Also, I am not sure, but I think that somebody could still patent the published idea within one year of the public disclosure.
Likewise, if Linksys has violated the terms of the GPL, they should be punished severely. Linksys's behavior, shipping GPL'ed code without identifying it as such, is a fundamental violation of the GPL, and if the only consequence is that companies have their wrists slapped when found out (and it has taken years to find this out about Linksys), it undermines the whole idea of the GPL.
While I understand your point that if there is no consequence to violating the GPL then people will violate it at will, I think that it would be best to save the "severe punishment" for those who decide to continue the violation AFTER being notified. It is a generally accepted fact of adult behavior (not the same as legal behavior) that people make mistakes, and that, if they correct their errors gracefully when notified, one forgives the original infraction.
"Throwing the book" at someone will usually achieve further compliance at the expense of good will and "don't work with GPL systems" future behavior.
In my experience, Linksys has been one of the better supported manufacturers for Linux based systems. I would rather not create an enemy, or give ammunition to our enemys, in order to win a rather hollow victory.
I would support this as a first step, but even better would require not just the payment, which could be automated, but also require that the work be republished in some publically available form.
This would mean that the work would either contunue to be available (and thus the content preserved) by the copyright holder, or that it would pass into public domain and be available to anyone interested enough to preserve it by republishing it.
(BTW, publically available != free, it just means you can't print one copy and put it in your vault to keep it away from others)
The copyright starts from the date of publication. Most of the 'thousands of photos' shot by a photographer in a year are never published. (Publication I think would include the photos sold even if only one print were ever made. Proofs produced and never sold probably don't count.)
As to the 'rich art whores' who produce crap. If it really is crap, then nobody will care that the copyright is extended; nobody will be interested.
The poor artists will renew the items that they are making money off of, and therfore should be able to afford the $1. If they can't manage to keep $1 from the last time they sold a print, they have bigger problems.
Don't I have the right to profit for the rest of my life from my work?
As others have pointed out, part of the purpose of Copyright was to encourage you to publish in the first place. What everybody seems to have forgotten is that the reason for the LIMITED TIME mentioned in the Consitiution was not only to allow the work to pass into Public Domain, but also to incourage you to produce more. (i.e., not just sit on your laurels after publishing one hit book.) That is part of why the original copyright was only a relatively short 14 years! You did good work once and were paid for it; now do it again.
OK, I'll bite. You imply that only somebody with a patent should be able to complain; I have one; I will complain.
While I have no problem with getting a patent on a product or process that is truly new, I have a great deal of difficulty accepting the "do X on a computer" where X is a current/old practice.
I also have problems with many of the "algorithm" patents as in many cases this is tantamount to patenting a fact. (historically you could not patent the discovery of a fact, ie Newton could not have patented the fact that F=ma) Mathematical tecniques are considered facts (Newton couldn't have patented Integration either) and many "software patents" verge on just that, an interesting mathematical tecnique. IMHO other "Facts" include much of the results of genetic research.
Sorry to step on your toes, but the current PTO will give anybody a patent on anything. Your patent APPS are probably as intellectually worthless as the PATENT that was AWARDED to me. So in short, get over yourself!
Note that my patent was actually a pretty good idea, just that some German thought of it (and patented it) about 30 years ago. When the german patent was found, I felt that my application should have been rejected. The corporate patent attorney just changed a few words and *presto*, patent awarded. My respect for the patent system ended immediatly.
If you have an aftermarket car modification you know that you are paying someone for the modification. If your supercharged engine burns a hole in a piston, it is your own damn fault. No ethical problem.
If you overclock your own processor (or even if you pay someone to do it) and it burns up, it is your own damn fault. Again no ethical problem.
On the other hand, if you go to your local 'whitebox' computer store to have a custom PC built, and you pay for a 2Ghz processor, but the builder puts a 1.6Ghz processor in the machine thereby causing the processor to burn up, there is an issue of fraud involved.
I have had this happen when I was the I.T. dept at a small company. We bought our PCs from another local company. One day one quit working. I isolated the cause to the processor, but when I removed the fan I could read the printing on the processor and found out that they had overclocked that machine.
It seemed to be an isolated incident (I checked the other machines) and might have been a mistake, but we never bought from that business again.
Simple... In the same place as the list of current patents. You just have to look back a few years, 17 or 20 to be specific.
Remember patents have a limited lifetime. (in contrast to copyright which effectivly now lasts forever [sic])
The one exception where just looking back 20 years won't get you all of the expired patents is that a patent can expire early if the maintainence fees aren't paid. (I don't recall exactly how often but it is something like every 5 or 7 years).
could I produce
the prior art, overturning the patent, then apply for a patent of my own and sue the ass off the original patent
applicant for licensing fees, since they would now be infringing on *my* patent?
Nope. You have to apply within one year of the original disclosure of your idea to *anyone*. Therefore, if you could produce the prior art, the most you could do is get the patent invalidated, but you would have to go to court to do that.
To a certain extent they don't, and that is part of the way the system is designed to work.
As an example, If I had a patent on the concept of a stool (probably called an elevated sitting device;-) but my patent describes a board with three legs, somebody else could patent an improvement of a stool with 4 legs. For that matter a thrid person could patent a stool with 4 legs and a back (essentially a chair).
Neither of the improvment inventors could make or sell their improved sitting devices without paying me royalties for my basic patent. I however could not utilize any of their improvements without paying them royalties.
Often in cases such as these, a cross licencing contract is created to allow us both to use the other's patented ideas. This is why IBM et al. try to get patents on anything and everything; if you try to sue them, they reach into their files and find something where you infringe on one of their patents.
This is the difficulty in the patent examiner's job. He has to decide whether an application is essentially the same as an existing item, or is an improvement on the prior art. Often, the examiner may ask the applicant to remove one or more claims (which the examiner thinks are duplicative of the prior art) leaving only the claims that represent the improvement.
At least in Michigan you don't even have to leave the store to be shoplifting. It depends on the store layout, but simply bypassing the register without paying for an item from the store can constitute shoplifting. This is why many stores make a point of placing the register in a position such that you have no way of exiting without definitely passing the register, and there is nothing between the register and the door. (vs. the common "mall store" layout where the register is at the middle or back of the store, enticing you into the store and forcing you to walk past as much of the merchandise as possible.)
If there is no valid reason for you to have passed the register (to look at a display etc) and no way for you to have mistakenly passed it, the store CAN nab you right there, although they will still usually wait until you get to the door. (makes a better legal case, and accidents do happen so why piss off an honest customer who makes an accident)
Funny shoplifting story: My neighbor was a security guard for Montgomery Ward. One pair of theves almost got away with stealing a canoe! They walked out with it in plain sight (like one could hide a canoe) and security wasn't sure so they didn't stop them... until the theves came back and tried to steal the oars.
I believe that this will be the case with any oem install of windows. IIRC Microsoft made it a requirement of the OEM pricing that the consumer does not receive an official windows CD (which could presumably be installed on a different machine easily).
The oem may provide means of backup, on another partition, or write to a bunch of floppies or CD etc, but these wind up as corrupted versions of windows that are tailored to the specific machine, without the full install capibilities etc.
Sorry for the nubie question, but on a recently purchased mac (I could reinstall without too much pain), what are the critical items to backup?
You mention the system folders. I have also heard mention of preference files, although I am not sure exactly which/where these are. Any other items I should be looking for?
I could be wrong, IANAL, but I don't think that a law school student learns every law that is on the books. Rather, the student learns some of the important basic history, etc. and learns how/where to look for the specifics when the need arises.
If law school is anything like Engineering, the main point of the schooling is not really to teach you all the facts as much as to teach you how to think like an Engineer/Lawyer/etc. while giving you some of the building blocks to form a base to build on during your carreer. That is why one pays more for an Engineer or Lawyer with 10 yrs. experiance than one does for a recent graduate.
You want a comprehensive set of rules to regulate the infinite variety of human behaviour...
Some of us don't want a "comprehensive set of rules." A simple set, boiling down to "play nice and don't touch other peoples toys" covers most situations.
Ok, ok. It does take a bit more than that, but the current situation is a bit cracked; one could probably spend one's entire life (and then some)just reading all of the law, etc. that is supposed to regulate one's actions. Remember, ignorance of the law is no excuse! but knowledge of the law would practically require omniscience.
The obvious reason is to prevent people from copying the software then returning it.
The less obvious reason, which happened to me at a store that does accept returns, is that I bought a box of software only to discover that the registration code wasn't in it. The EULA envelope was also pre-opened, so I can only assume that it was a returned box. The store accepts return for exchange so I did, noting the missing codes.
Probably the first mistake was to admit to that missing Visio License. If it was only one item, why not go down to the local store, buy another copy of visio, uninstall, reinstall, etc. Later, if there were a non-self audit and the timing was questioned, simply claim "Jim-Bob needed Visio so we bought another copy. Just because it was around the time of our self-audit doens't change the fact that Jim-Bob needed more software."
Note that this probably wouldn't work if the company were truly using a large number of illegal copies. "Gee, our complete office just decided that they need MS Word," probably wouldn't fly.
Of course the receipt thing is just ridiculous. I am sure that I have a ton of software that I purchased and would have difficulty finding the receipt for (although it sounds like I shouldn't admit that). Even the IRS only requires you to keep records 7 years!
Holy cow! You mean if I drive up to a gas station and then drive away without actually buying anything I can be sued?
I'm gonna have to watch myself in the future in that case.
You might not get sued, but you centanly could be pulled over for "avoiding an intersection" (or something like that).
It happened to my sister when she witnessed what she deemed to be a volitile arguement in a party store where she was going to ask for directions in a bad section of Detroit. She decided she really didn't feel like getting shot, and so kept driving, and was immediatly pulled over by an undercover cop and given a ticket.
Very odd, given that plainclothes cops usually don't enforce traffic violations, as that kinda blows their cover.
The fact that 30 years after we put man on the moon, this is the best NASA can come up with: Unfathomible.
I believe if you read, you will find that this is an experiment designed by school children. NASA has provided a small cylinder (if I recall it is about the size of a 5 gallon pail) as a sealed payload available to school programs to help interest children in science.
While you are correct (by implication) that every pound of payload costs money in fuel etc. and is therefore expensive, the idea here is that you never know what child is going to be the next Einstein (or Zephram Cochran;-) ) if given the right opportunities. So we donate a small area to the children.
If you think about it, the kids also have to learn to plan for recording their data, launch and reentry forces, etc. It is no small thing that these kids are learning for themselves. Also, IIRC there is a competetion amongst schools to even receive the opportunity to use the payload space.
So in fact the experience gained by the students may actually prove: Priceless
At Best Buy I recently saw SACDs (Super Audio CDs) which are supposed to be an audio CD recorded in DTS surround sound like a DVD.
Has anyone here used/played with one of these? What level of DRM technology do they employ? CSS like on a DVD? or something else entirely? (or none at all like a CD -- unlikely but possible.)
Slashdot Mirror
I have run into plenty of hardware (and software) that doesn't work correctly in a newer version of windows. It wouldn't be much harder for a company to say "compatible with: ... Linux (2.4.19-2.4.24)." One would know that it would work within those kernals, and it might work with others, but no promises.
Ok, If it needs to be "published" in dead tree format. Then perhaps someone should start a new magazine. Published monthly, it could collect ideas online and publish them to preserve their freedom.
On the other hand, with patents if you were to very generally describe an idea, others could still patent a very specific implementation. If you were to be specific, others would just have to be specifically different. It would still be better to actually patent some of these ideas (ala IBM) for defensive use.
Also, I am not sure, but I think that somebody could still patent the published idea within one year of the public disclosure.
While I understand your point that if there is no consequence to violating the GPL then people will violate it at will, I think that it would be best to save the "severe punishment" for those who decide to continue the violation AFTER being notified. It is a generally accepted fact of adult behavior (not the same as legal behavior) that people make mistakes, and that, if they correct their errors gracefully when notified, one forgives the original infraction. "Throwing the book" at someone will usually achieve further compliance at the expense of good will and "don't work with GPL systems" future behavior.
In my experience, Linksys has been one of the better supported manufacturers for Linux based systems. I would rather not create an enemy, or give ammunition to our enemys, in order to win a rather hollow victory.
I would support this as a first step, but even better would require not just the payment, which could be automated, but also require that the work be republished in some publically available form.
This would mean that the work would either contunue to be available (and thus the content preserved) by the copyright holder, or that it would pass into public domain and be available to anyone interested enough to preserve it by republishing it.
(BTW, publically available != free, it just means you can't print one copy and put it in your vault to keep it away from others)
The copyright starts from the date of publication. Most of the 'thousands of photos' shot by a photographer in a year are never published. (Publication I think would include the photos sold even if only one print were ever made. Proofs produced and never sold probably don't count.)
As to the 'rich art whores' who produce crap. If it really is crap, then nobody will care that the copyright is extended; nobody will be interested.
The poor artists will renew the items that they are making money off of, and therfore should be able to afford the $1. If they can't manage to keep $1 from the last time they sold a print, they have bigger problems.
As others have pointed out, part of the purpose of Copyright was to encourage you to publish in the first place. What everybody seems to have forgotten is that the reason for the LIMITED TIME mentioned in the Consitiution was not only to allow the work to pass into Public Domain, but also to incourage you to produce more. (i.e., not just sit on your laurels after publishing one hit book.) That is part of why the original copyright was only a relatively short 14 years! You did good work once and were paid for it; now do it again.
OK, I'll bite. You imply that only somebody with a patent should be able to complain; I have one; I will complain.
While I have no problem with getting a patent on a product or process that is truly new, I have a great deal of difficulty accepting the "do X on a computer" where X is a current/old practice.
I also have problems with many of the "algorithm" patents as in many cases this is tantamount to patenting a fact. (historically you could not patent the discovery of a fact, ie Newton could not have patented the fact that F=ma) Mathematical tecniques are considered facts (Newton couldn't have patented Integration either) and many "software patents" verge on just that, an interesting mathematical tecnique. IMHO other "Facts" include much of the results of genetic research.
Sorry to step on your toes, but the current PTO will give anybody a patent on anything. Your patent APPS are probably as intellectually worthless as the PATENT that was AWARDED to me. So in short, get over yourself!
Note that my patent was actually a pretty good idea, just that some German thought of it (and patented it) about 30 years ago. When the german patent was found, I felt that my application should have been rejected. The corporate patent attorney just changed a few words and *presto*, patent awarded. My respect for the patent system ended immediatly.
I'm sure MS would love that to happen in court. Just add water, and *voila*, instant FUD.
Hmm... I would think that Linus could make them cease and desist using the LINUX there as he owns the trademark.
If you have an aftermarket car modification you know that you are paying someone for the modification. If your supercharged engine burns a hole in a piston, it is your own damn fault. No ethical problem.
If you overclock your own processor (or even if you pay someone to do it) and it burns up, it is your own damn fault. Again no ethical problem.
On the other hand, if you go to your local 'whitebox' computer store to have a custom PC built, and you pay for a 2Ghz processor, but the builder puts a 1.6Ghz processor in the machine thereby causing the processor to burn up, there is an issue of fraud involved.
I have had this happen when I was the I.T. dept at a small company. We bought our PCs from another local company. One day one quit working. I isolated the cause to the processor, but when I removed the fan I could read the printing on the processor and found out that they had overclocked that machine.
It seemed to be an isolated incident (I checked the other machines) and might have been a mistake, but we never bought from that business again.
Where is the list of expired patents?
Simple... In the same place as the list of current patents. You just have to look back a few years, 17 or 20 to be specific.
Remember patents have a limited lifetime. (in contrast to copyright which effectivly now lasts forever [sic])
The one exception where just looking back 20 years won't get you all of the expired patents is that a patent can expire early if the maintainence fees aren't paid. (I don't recall exactly how often but it is something like every 5 or 7 years).
I am sure they would love this
"Bell, can I have a VPN"
Yes for an additonal $40 for a business line
"Bell, can I have a VPN"
Yes for an additonal $40 for a business line
"Bell, can I have a VPN"
Yes for an additonal $40 for a business line
etc...
Nope. You have to apply within one year of the original disclosure of your idea to *anyone*. Therefore, if you could produce the prior art, the most you could do is get the patent invalidated, but you would have to go to court to do that.
To a certain extent they don't, and that is part of the way the system is designed to work.
;-) but my patent describes a board with three legs, somebody else could patent an improvement of a stool with 4 legs. For that matter a thrid person could patent a stool with 4 legs and a back (essentially a chair).
As an example, If I had a patent on the concept of a stool (probably called an elevated sitting device
Neither of the improvment inventors could make or sell their improved sitting devices without paying me royalties for my basic patent. I however could not utilize any of their improvements without paying them royalties.
Often in cases such as these, a cross licencing contract is created to allow us both to use the other's patented ideas. This is why IBM et al. try to get patents on anything and everything; if you try to sue them, they reach into their files and find something where you infringe on one of their patents.
This is the difficulty in the patent examiner's job. He has to decide whether an application is essentially the same as an existing item, or is an improvement on the prior art. Often, the examiner may ask the applicant to remove one or more claims (which the examiner thinks are duplicative of the prior art) leaving only the claims that represent the improvement.
At least in Michigan you don't even have to leave the store to be shoplifting. It depends on the store layout, but simply bypassing the register without paying for an item from the store can constitute shoplifting. This is why many stores make a point of placing the register in a position such that you have no way of exiting without definitely passing the register, and there is nothing between the register and the door. (vs. the common "mall store" layout where the register is at the middle or back of the store, enticing you into the store and forcing you to walk past as much of the merchandise as possible.)
If there is no valid reason for you to have passed the register (to look at a display etc) and no way for you to have mistakenly passed it, the store CAN nab you right there, although they will still usually wait until you get to the door. (makes a better legal case, and accidents do happen so why piss off an honest customer who makes an accident)
Funny shoplifting story: My neighbor was a security guard for Montgomery Ward. One pair of theves almost got away with stealing a canoe! They walked out with it in plain sight (like one could hide a canoe) and security wasn't sure so they didn't stop them... until the theves came back and tried to steal the oars.
To use iSync you still need to install Palm Desktop 4.0 to get Palm's hotsync software.
That being said, I have had no problems with any of the softare mentioned, either from Palm or Apple.
The oem may provide means of backup, on another partition, or write to a bunch of floppies or CD etc, but these wind up as corrupted versions of windows that are tailored to the specific machine, without the full install capibilities etc.
Sorry for the nubie question, but on a recently purchased mac (I could reinstall without too much pain), what are the critical items to backup?
You mention the system folders. I have also heard mention of preference files, although I am not sure exactly which/where these are. Any other items I should be looking for?
If law school is anything like Engineering, the main point of the schooling is not really to teach you all the facts as much as to teach you how to think like an Engineer/Lawyer/etc. while giving you some of the building blocks to form a base to build on during your carreer. That is why one pays more for an Engineer or Lawyer with 10 yrs. experiance than one does for a recent graduate.
Some of us don't want a "comprehensive set of rules." A simple set, boiling down to "play nice and don't touch other peoples toys" covers most situations.
Ok, ok. It does take a bit more than that, but the current situation is a bit cracked; one could probably spend one's entire life (and then some)just reading all of the law, etc. that is supposed to regulate one's actions. Remember, ignorance of the law is no excuse! but knowledge of the law would practically require omniscience.
The obvious reason is to prevent people from copying the software then returning it.
The less obvious reason, which happened to me at a store that does accept returns, is that I bought a box of software only to discover that the registration code wasn't in it. The EULA envelope was also pre-opened, so I can only assume that it was a returned box. The store accepts return for exchange so I did, noting the missing codes.
Note that this probably wouldn't work if the company were truly using a large number of illegal copies. "Gee, our complete office just decided that they need MS Word," probably wouldn't fly.
Of course the receipt thing is just ridiculous. I am sure that I have a ton of software that I purchased and would have difficulty finding the receipt for (although it sounds like I shouldn't admit that). Even the IRS only requires you to keep records 7 years!
You might not get sued, but you centanly could be pulled over for "avoiding an intersection" (or something like that).
It happened to my sister when she witnessed what she deemed to be a volitile arguement in a party store where she was going to ask for directions in a bad section of Detroit. She decided she really didn't feel like getting shot, and so kept driving, and was immediatly pulled over by an undercover cop and given a ticket.
Very odd, given that plainclothes cops usually don't enforce traffic violations, as that kinda blows their cover.
I believe if you read, you will find that this is an experiment designed by school children. NASA has provided a small cylinder (if I recall it is about the size of a 5 gallon pail) as a sealed payload available to school programs to help interest children in science.
While you are correct (by implication) that every pound of payload costs money in fuel etc. and is therefore expensive, the idea here is that you never know what child is going to be the next Einstein (or Zephram Cochran ;-) ) if given the right opportunities. So we donate a small area to the children.
If you think about it, the kids also have to learn to plan for recording their data, launch and reentry forces, etc. It is no small thing that these kids are learning for themselves. Also, IIRC there is a competetion amongst schools to even receive the opportunity to use the payload space.
So in fact the experience gained by the students may actually prove: Priceless
Has anyone here used/played with one of these? What level of DRM technology do they employ? CSS like on a DVD? or something else entirely? (or none at all like a CD -- unlikely but possible.)