from wikipedia : In a state of war, families would go to the mattresses -- rent vacant apartments and have a number of soldiers sleeping on mattresses on the floor in shifts, with the others ready at the windows to fire at members of rival families.
hmmm and there I was thinking that the various federal laws on the collection of debts prohibit you from publishing details of the debt, other than through licensed credit reporting agencies.
I still haven't figured this one out - A passport is a document that essentially demands safe passage for you in the name of your government while abroad. So why on earth do you need one to return to your own country ?
Chances are that AT&T doesn't hold patents on this technology outside the US. They are trying to use the US courts to block international distribution.
Other stories I've seen about the case said that the court ruled that US patents do not apply outside the US. Therefore microsoft can't be infringing AT&T patents outside the US. I'm sure AT&T's argument was on the theory that all copies of windows came from the US therefore they could stretch US patent laws to cover windows sold outside the US.
Breath tests are pretty useless for testing for alcohol anyway. A little research reveals that they can't distinguish between alochol and any of a hundred other checmicals that may appear in your breath for completely innocent reasons. They're a good field guide to who needs to be blood tested and not much else.
Any drug testing lab should have had a test subject complete a questionaire detailing any foods they have eaten which may lead to low level false positive results. The lower the level of something you are looking for the more likely it is that the test will give spurious results. The fact that companies continue to employ these labs just proves the lack of education out there on the subject.
Small claims doesn't really have discovery - at least not here in Washington. The rules of evidence generally are a lot lest strick it small claims matters.
You file a complaint, if the other side files an answer a hearing date gets set - that's it.
You are not buying a license to view the film. You are buying a physical media containing the film. You are granted a license to view the film each time you insert it into a properly licensed DVD player.
"In the United States, inventors and their patent agents or attorneys are required by law to submit any prior art they are aware of to the United States Patent and Trademark Office so that the patent examiner can take the prior art into account when examining the patent application."
Now is a telephone company going to claim that they had no knowledge of discussions within a standards setting body which was setting standards for making telephone calls over IP - the very subject of this patent ?
The judge in the blackberry case still imposed an injunction after the patent office invalidated the patents. Blackberry was forced to license invalid patents in order to stay in business.
Slashdot Mirror
You're right ... I guess "nobody Rs TFA" looked funny.
You youngster you !
My first PC with a Hard drive had 32MB (yes MB)
Where nobody R's the TFA but instead spends their time making fun of the summary.
Surely stopping one or more storms would just lead to more poweful ones forming as the heat in the system continues to increase.
Have you seen the Godfather ?
from wikipedia : In a state of war, families would go to the mattresses -- rent vacant apartments and have a number of soldiers sleeping on mattresses on the floor in shifts, with the others ready at the windows to fire at members of rival families.
No you're thinking of making it illegal to make it illegal. Not the same at all.
... Magic Moonbeams
There's probably more mercury in your teeth than in flourescent type lamps around your house.
I don't believe the DMCA actually prohbits the distribution on encryption keys - but rather the device necessary to use that key to decrypt the data.
hmmm and there I was thinking that the various federal laws on the collection of debts prohibit you from publishing details of the debt, other than through licensed credit reporting agencies.
This one came up second for me :
I pray that God will smite my critics and as I close my eyes I can feel God's massive love throbbing within me. Oh, God!
I still haven't figured this one out - A passport is a document that essentially demands safe passage for you in the name of your government while abroad. So why on earth do you need one to return to your own country ?
"Unlicensed implementations of AACS are still copyright infringement"
... however I don't think the limits of reverse engineering for interoperability have been tested yet.
Under what legal theory ? I could see a patent infringement claim but writing your own software to play the disc isn't copyright infringement.
Could it be a DMCA violation - possibly
Chances are that AT&T doesn't hold patents on this technology outside the US. They are trying to use the US courts to block international distribution.
ITS A DIFFERENT STORY
Different story
Other stories I've seen about the case said that the court ruled that US patents do not apply outside the US. Therefore microsoft can't be infringing AT&T patents outside the US. I'm sure AT&T's argument was on the theory that all copies of windows came from the US therefore they could stretch US patent laws to cover windows sold outside the US.
A device called an OTDR will tell you how far along the cable the break is - then you go find it, haul it up to the ship with a big hook and fix it.
Breath tests are pretty useless for testing for alcohol anyway. A little research reveals that they can't distinguish between alochol and any of a hundred other checmicals that may appear in your breath for completely innocent reasons. They're a good field guide to who needs to be blood tested and not much else.
Any drug testing lab should have had a test subject complete a questionaire detailing any foods they have eaten which may lead to low level false positive results. The lower the level of something you are looking for the more likely it is that the test will give spurious results. The fact that companies continue to employ these labs just proves the lack of education out there on the subject.
I believe the DRM support required all of that to be in kernel space.
Small claims doesn't really have discovery - at least not here in Washington. The rules of evidence generally are a lot lest strick it small claims matters.
You file a complaint, if the other side files an answer a hearing date gets set - that's it.
Actually the MPAA's take is weirder than that:
You are not buying a license to view the film. You are buying a physical media containing the film. You are granted a license to view the film each time you insert it into a properly licensed DVD player.
You can electronically file any time and have the payment come out of your bank on the last day - there's no need to file at the last possible minute.
From wikipedia:
"In the United States, inventors and their patent agents or attorneys are required by law to submit any prior art they are aware of to the United States Patent and Trademark Office so that the patent examiner can take the prior art into account when examining the patent application."
Now is a telephone company going to claim that they had no knowledge of discussions within a standards setting body which was setting standards for making telephone calls over IP - the very subject of this patent ?
The judge in the blackberry case still imposed an injunction after the patent office invalidated the patents. Blackberry was forced to license invalid patents in order to stay in business.