The problem is that the money won't be spent on actually inventing new products because the company won't be able to make back the money selling the product. Look at prescription drugs. While there is no doubt that a lot of crap happens with patents and prescription drugs, good drugs would never be invented if there wasn't adequate IP protection for them. The cost of developing and testing drugs is far too high. Companies need to be able to recoup their costs from R&D.
You notice the problem that it is much easier to analyze inventions and copy them than it is to hide the invention. Why would anybody innovate products that require significant R&D then?
Software is much better looked at as an exception to patent law than the direct example of how things should be done. The extreme rate of development and low cost of research in software (and obviousness of a lot of it) are not congruant to many other fields.
Actually, you are exactly wrong. Most patent lawyers have carte blance to write the patent and its claims and after they have written up the patent they get it approved by the inventor and the company. Patent lawyers are not heavily supervised in the creation of patent claims. Of course, they do not bring new actions against companies without the clear direction of the company they are working for, but patent prosecution is usually pretty hands off.
I believe that resteraunt is the one his parents used to own. Either way, he stated in the article that people were pushing him to open big resteraunts all throughout major tourist spots (NYC, San Fran., Las Vegas, etc.).
I read an article about Ming Tsai (the wonderful host of East Meets West) where he noted that, after his show became popular, he came under enormous amounts of pressure to open resteraunts across America a la Emerill. He turned down the offers, and I was wondering if you have come under the same pressure and what is your feeling towards opening up resterants capitalizing on your celebrity.
Any talk of this being a Clinton-caused recession is just willfully ignoring that the Bush's tax cut caused nearly half of the budget shortfall.
Why? Is there any proof that the tax cut is causing the recession? NO. This recession was mainly caused by stupid investors. People put FAR too much money in companies that had absolutely no way to sustain themselves. Secondary causes to the recession are undoubtaly the war on terror. The uncertainty caused by 9/11 has dragged down the stock market and killed consumer confidence. Finally, corporate fraud has helped keep the recession down. Most of the corporate fraud has been reporting revenue incorrectly so that companies would appear to be profitable. If they had reported their earning correctly, the companies would still be bankrupt, and the economy wouldn't be that much better (not to imply that it wouldn't be better at all).
Ask yourself if you're better off now or 4 years ago. Good, now vote Democrat in November.
What a dumb statement. You should ask yourself what would have been different if Al Gore had been president, and whether or not you would have been better off. It would be interesting to know what Mr. Gore would have done in response to 9/11 and to all of the accounting scandals. That is the better question to ask yourself. But even that is a stupid way to determine who you should vote for. You should evaluate the candidates, not whether or not they are Democratic, Republican, etc., but whether or not they will represent *your* interests in government. That is the entire point of a Republic.
I agree that Levitt tried to crack down on these sort of shenanigans. I just think that blaming the entire mess on the Republicans is stupid since Lieberman was the main force stopping Levitt from implementing stricter rules.
Yeah! Lets all vote Democrat, because we know that the Democrats would NEVER try to protect corporate cronies. We can all vote in people like Joe Lieberman, who led the fight in the Senate to stop the SEC from implementing tighter controls on accounting firms. Many of these accounting irregularities happened under the watchful eye of Clinton's SEC.
Republicans tend to believe in a more free market than Democrats, but that does not mean that they believe that misrepresentation of corporate financials is a good thing. A free market need accurate information to operate correctly, and many Republicans know that. (Almost) no one is for the fraud that has been occuring, and to blame Republicans for the current corporate scandals is silly.
Let's keep in mind that our Republican friends constantly say that they want to "run the Government like a business."
The last time I checked, that meant charging too much, underpaying the working stiffs, and playing golf on the profits for the handfull of winners. Good luck.
What do you think that government does right now? The main push for running government like a business is so that government will have some incentives to be a little more effecient than the crap that it pulls these days. A government organization is one of the most ineffecient organizations there can be, and trying to minimize this ineffeciency can only be a good thing. Of course, there are many times when government plays an important role in keeping our society operational, but all parts of government need to be analyzed to make sure that they are operating in the most effecient manner.
Your reading of the GPL is wrong. They don't have to provide the source for the adware and spyware since they are separate programs that are just distributed with the program as well. The GPL does not prevent the distribution of closed-source programs with open-source programs. If it did, then no Linux distribution could contain any closed-source code.
The truth is, this is theft, and I don't see Neoaudio releasing the source code for their product which uses CDex
Because you obviously didn't look. NeoNapster is providing the source code, so they are not violating the GPL.
If a product is in everyday use, then the product cannot be patented. Patents are only available for novel and non-obvious ideas. The greater problems are 1) The enourmous amount of time it takes to get a patent through the PTO (several years) and 2) people enforcing old patents against products that have become common usage.
They are both black. Thus, a pot should never call a kettle black because it is black itself. Just as Verisign should not be whining about ICANN holding too much power when Verisign holds an enormous amount itself.
Not wanting to even think about why it is better to kill someone than to blind them, how does this weapon effect those treaties.
Obviously, you don't want to
Read the article that explains it, or
Read the hundreds of other responses which address this as well.
In case you haven't gotten it yet, this weapon does not affect treaties against using weapons to blind, because blinding is not the primary purpose of the weapon.
And yes, last time I did my taxes, my total payments to the state were over %50, and I'm in a medium tax bracket.
I would hate to know what you were doing to get taxes that high. The average family in the United States pays between 20-25% of their income to taxes.
Of course your pro-libertarian rant left out many of the complexities of the marketplace that cause free market economics. Namely, you left out the ability of consumers to obtain accurate information, and the strong anti-competitive pressure that a network effect can have. As we have seen from recent corporate scandals, consumer often have a very hard time obtaining accurate information about products they would like to purchase. Microsoft is a very good example of this. They can spew FUD with the best of them, and their misinformation machine will cause consumers to purchase items which are not actually in their best interests. Also, the network effect of economics makes it so that many people won't want to switch to a operating system that other people are not currently using, because the OS doesn't give them the value that it normally would with an increased number of other users.
I bet you are one of these people who complain when duplicate stories are posted saying, "The least they could do is run a search on/." Amazingly, when I ran a search for "debian", the first thing I found was the announcement that Woody went gold. There were only 490 comments on the article.
There really needs to be a 'statute of limitations' on patents so that a company who doesn't enforce an obviously infringed patent can't come back 10 years later and prosecute.
There is. It is called laches. You can't enforce an infringemed patent after 6 years.
Amazingly, you can't do it. It is called the equitable defense of laches. Laches says that if you have an unreasonable delay is bringing suit against someone, you can't get any damages for their infringement of your patent during your delay. Your patent doesn't expire, but it become very limited in who you can sue with it. You can read MUCH more about laches at this site.
The McDonalds hot coffee incident was much worse than it was played out to the media. McDonalds had been told by many people that their coffee was FAR too hot to be served to people. They consistently kept their coffee 20-30 degrees hotter than everyone else. The woman who had it spilled onto her groin had third degree burns over the majority of her groin. This was not just some case where someone got a little hurt because they spilled hot water on themselves.
Reparations for the ancestors of the slaves?
No one in modern times has ever received money for slave reparations (nor should the in my opinion).
I thought it was just me at first, but do any books that get a rating that is not 9 get posted? I went to the book section and checked out the most recent reviews. Of the last nine books reviewed, eight of them got a nine, and the other got five stars (out of five I assume). The two book reviews before that (both in the Java meets XP subject) got 7's.
I would like to see someone review a book that isn't very good, and tell us why. It almost seems that these great book reviews are being pushed so someone can make some bucks through an affiliate program.
Did you even read any of the articles? Ford cared because the owner of "fuckgeneralmotots.com" pointed the domain name at ford.com. They thought that people would think that they (Ford) did do it, and that is why they sued. Ford did not want customers to think that they would buy such a domain name and point it at themselves.
Don't expect this holding to last. This decision was made by a three judge division of the Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. The government could next file a motion for rehearing and rehearing en banc. The motion for rehearing will ask the three judges to look at the decision again because the missed something. The judges will turn that down. The rehearing en banc will ask all of the judges in the circuit to hear the case and rule on it. The government will file for rehearing en banc if they think the overall composition of the court is more "conservative" than the one that gave the ruling today.
Assuming that those motions are not made, or are denied, it will go to the Supreme Court. Don't expect the Supreme Court to uphold this decision. The current Supreme Court is moderately conservative even if some of the judges who were appointed by Republicans wouldn't show it. Renquist, Scalia, and Thomas will follow their usual pattern of voting together and they will keep it in. Ginsburg and Breyer could go the other way. Kennedy and O'Conner should both vote to keep it in even though they are both sorta unpredicatable (especially good ole Sandra). Souter and Stevens will also probably vote for it to stay in. So, there are three definately for keeping it, two who are probably against, and four who could go either way, but will most likely vote for.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that the money won't be spent on actually inventing new products because the company won't be able to make back the money selling the product. Look at prescription drugs. While there is no doubt that a lot of crap happens with patents and prescription drugs, good drugs would never be invented if there wasn't adequate IP protection for them. The cost of developing and testing drugs is far too high. Companies need to be able to recoup their costs from R&D.
You notice the problem that it is much easier to analyze inventions and copy them than it is to hide the invention. Why would anybody innovate products that require significant R&D then?
Software is much better looked at as an exception to patent law than the direct example of how things should be done. The extreme rate of development and low cost of research in software (and obviousness of a lot of it) are not congruant to many other fields.
So, exactly how DOES your sock taste?
Not as bad as I thought.
Of course, a duo laptop was not a "Powerbook" because it didn't have a PowerPC processor. But who expects a "journalist" to know such a thing.
This link is valid, you just have to remove the extra space that /. put into it. Or, if you are lazy, you can just click here.
Actually, you are exactly wrong. Most patent lawyers have carte blance to write the patent and its claims and after they have written up the patent they get it approved by the inventor and the company. Patent lawyers are not heavily supervised in the creation of patent claims. Of course, they do not bring new actions against companies without the clear direction of the company they are working for, but patent prosecution is usually pretty hands off.
I believe that resteraunt is the one his parents used to own. Either way, he stated in the article that people were pushing him to open big resteraunts all throughout major tourist spots (NYC, San Fran., Las Vegas, etc.).
I read an article about Ming Tsai (the wonderful host of East Meets West) where he noted that, after his show became popular, he came under enormous amounts of pressure to open resteraunts across America a la Emerill. He turned down the offers, and I was wondering if you have come under the same pressure and what is your feeling towards opening up resterants capitalizing on your celebrity.
Any talk of this being a Clinton-caused recession is just willfully ignoring that the Bush's tax cut caused nearly half of the budget shortfall.
Why? Is there any proof that the tax cut is causing the recession? NO. This recession was mainly caused by stupid investors. People put FAR too much money in companies that had absolutely no way to sustain themselves. Secondary causes to the recession are undoubtaly the war on terror. The uncertainty caused by 9/11 has dragged down the stock market and killed consumer confidence. Finally, corporate fraud has helped keep the recession down. Most of the corporate fraud has been reporting revenue incorrectly so that companies would appear to be profitable. If they had reported their earning correctly, the companies would still be bankrupt, and the economy wouldn't be that much better (not to imply that it wouldn't be better at all).
Ask yourself if you're better off now or 4 years ago. Good, now vote Democrat in November.
What a dumb statement. You should ask yourself what would have been different if Al Gore had been president, and whether or not you would have been better off. It would be interesting to know what Mr. Gore would have done in response to 9/11 and to all of the accounting scandals. That is the better question to ask yourself. But even that is a stupid way to determine who you should vote for. You should evaluate the candidates, not whether or not they are Democratic, Republican, etc., but whether or not they will represent *your* interests in government. That is the entire point of a Republic.
I agree that Levitt tried to crack down on these sort of shenanigans. I just think that blaming the entire mess on the Republicans is stupid since Lieberman was the main force stopping Levitt from implementing stricter rules.
Yeah! Lets all vote Democrat, because we know that the Democrats would NEVER try to protect corporate cronies. We can all vote in people like Joe Lieberman, who led the fight in the Senate to stop the SEC from implementing tighter controls on accounting firms. Many of these accounting irregularities happened under the watchful eye of Clinton's SEC.
Republicans tend to believe in a more free market than Democrats, but that does not mean that they believe that misrepresentation of corporate financials is a good thing. A free market need accurate information to operate correctly, and many Republicans know that. (Almost) no one is for the fraud that has been occuring, and to blame Republicans for the current corporate scandals is silly.
Let's keep in mind that our Republican friends constantly say that they want to "run the Government like a business."
The last time I checked, that meant charging too much, underpaying the working stiffs, and playing golf on the profits for the handfull of winners. Good luck.
What do you think that government does right now? The main push for running government like a business is so that government will have some incentives to be a little more effecient than the crap that it pulls these days. A government organization is one of the most ineffecient organizations there can be, and trying to minimize this ineffeciency can only be a good thing. Of course, there are many times when government plays an important role in keeping our society operational, but all parts of government need to be analyzed to make sure that they are operating in the most effecient manner.
Sorry about the rambling.
Your reading of the GPL is wrong. They don't have to provide the source for the adware and spyware since they are separate programs that are just distributed with the program as well. The GPL does not prevent the distribution of closed-source programs with open-source programs. If it did, then no Linux distribution could contain any closed-source code.
The truth is, this is theft, and I don't see Neoaudio releasing the source code for their product which uses CDex Because you obviously didn't look. NeoNapster is providing the source code, so they are not violating the GPL.
If a product is in everyday use, then the product cannot be patented. Patents are only available for novel and non-obvious ideas. The greater problems are 1) The enourmous amount of time it takes to get a patent through the PTO (several years) and 2) people enforcing old patents against products that have become common usage.
They are both black. Thus, a pot should never call a kettle black because it is black itself. Just as Verisign should not be whining about ICANN holding too much power when Verisign holds an enormous amount itself.
I don't think this is a situation where one coder is supposed to do 90% of the work. Thus, it will be quite a bit more than 10% late.
Obviously, you don't want to
- Read the article that explains it, or
- Read the hundreds of other responses which address this as well.
In case you haven't gotten it yet, this weapon does not affect treaties against using weapons to blind, because blinding is not the primary purpose of the weapon.And yes, last time I did my taxes, my total payments to the state were over %50, and I'm in a medium tax bracket.
I would hate to know what you were doing to get taxes that high. The average family in the United States pays between 20-25% of their income to taxes.
Of course your pro-libertarian rant left out many of the complexities of the marketplace that cause free market economics. Namely, you left out the ability of consumers to obtain accurate information, and the strong anti-competitive pressure that a network effect can have. As we have seen from recent corporate scandals, consumer often have a very hard time obtaining accurate information about products they would like to purchase. Microsoft is a very good example of this. They can spew FUD with the best of them, and their misinformation machine will cause consumers to purchase items which are not actually in their best interests. Also, the network effect of economics makes it so that many people won't want to switch to a operating system that other people are not currently using, because the OS doesn't give them the value that it normally would with an increased number of other users.
I bet you are one of these people who complain when duplicate stories are posted saying, "The least they could do is run a search on /." Amazingly, when I ran a search for "debian", the first thing I found was the announcement that Woody went gold. There were only 490 comments on the article.
There really needs to be a 'statute of limitations' on patents so that a company who doesn't enforce an obviously infringed patent can't come back 10 years later and prosecute.
There is. It is called laches. You can't enforce an infringemed patent after 6 years.
Amazingly, you can't do it. It is called the equitable defense of laches. Laches says that if you have an unreasonable delay is bringing suit against someone, you can't get any damages for their infringement of your patent during your delay. Your patent doesn't expire, but it become very limited in who you can sue with it. You can read MUCH more about laches at this site.
Hot coffee, anoyone?
The McDonalds hot coffee incident was much worse than it was played out to the media. McDonalds had been told by many people that their coffee was FAR too hot to be served to people. They consistently kept their coffee 20-30 degrees hotter than everyone else. The woman who had it spilled onto her groin had third degree burns over the majority of her groin. This was not just some case where someone got a little hurt because they spilled hot water on themselves.
Reparations for the ancestors of the slaves?
No one in modern times has ever received money for slave reparations (nor should the in my opinion).
I thought it was just me at first, but do any books that get a rating that is not 9 get posted? I went to the book section and checked out the most recent reviews. Of the last nine books reviewed, eight of them got a nine, and the other got five stars (out of five I assume). The two book reviews before that (both in the Java meets XP subject) got 7's.
I would like to see someone review a book that isn't very good, and tell us why. It almost seems that these great book reviews are being pushed so someone can make some bucks through an affiliate program.
Did you even read any of the articles? Ford cared because the owner of "fuckgeneralmotots.com" pointed the domain name at ford.com. They thought that people would think that they (Ford) did do it, and that is why they sued. Ford did not want customers to think that they would buy such a domain name and point it at themselves.
The U.S. was isolationist until we got hit in Perl.
Damn that Larry Wall and his globalization policy!
Don't expect this holding to last. This decision was made by a three judge division of the Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. The government could next file a motion for rehearing and rehearing en banc. The motion for rehearing will ask the three judges to look at the decision again because the missed something. The judges will turn that down. The rehearing en banc will ask all of the judges in the circuit to hear the case and rule on it. The government will file for rehearing en banc if they think the overall composition of the court is more "conservative" than the one that gave the ruling today.
Assuming that those motions are not made, or are denied, it will go to the Supreme Court. Don't expect the Supreme Court to uphold this decision. The current Supreme Court is moderately conservative even if some of the judges who were appointed by Republicans wouldn't show it. Renquist, Scalia, and Thomas will follow their usual pattern of voting together and they will keep it in. Ginsburg and Breyer could go the other way. Kennedy and O'Conner should both vote to keep it in even though they are both sorta unpredicatable (especially good ole Sandra). Souter and Stevens will also probably vote for it to stay in. So, there are three definately for keeping it, two who are probably against, and four who could go either way, but will most likely vote for.
Sorry for the rambling, and oh yeah, IANAL(Y).