TiVo also owns exclusive rights to patent #5,241,428. Claim 1 of that patent is incredibly broad, and my example clearly violates it. There is no legal way to "not do it the way TiVo did".
Well, it must not be so clear if your example doesn't really do what they are claiming.
means for controlling operation of said means for storing and said means for playback such that said converted signal can be continuously stored on said storage medium during either continuous or intermittent reconstitution of the stored signal as a video signal, whereby a user can control a variable delay between the storage and playback of a particular portion of a given video signal
Did you actually try your example? Go ahead, I'll wait...
Back yet?
OK... what happened when you got to the end of the file and "caught up" with the live recording...
I'll give you a hint: exiting... end of file
You see, Tivo has this nifty *variable* delay feature. And that is what they patented. And it covers little things like "catching up" to the live data stream (variable delay = 0) and having the stream continue to grow.
Your example doesn't do that. Playback stops when the delay = 0.
One concern I immediately had -- and I happily saw noted in the article as well -- is the question of who will pay to support this? Data storage isn't free, or cheap.
The concern I immediately had was... which companies do I need to buy stock in.
Because, as you said, storage isn't free. (or cheap in quantity)
I think one of the reasons they didn't include such functionality is pressure from broadcasters/advertisers.
BZZT!
What came out at the trial was that they *tried* to provide the functionality, but could not get it to work. (no matter how "obvious" and "simple" people in this thread insist it is)
They were only able to get it to work after studying Tivo's unit.
Much more the clincher in this case is that many of the things that TiVo claimed infringement on were things that they had exposed Dish to in licensing meetings that eventually failed.
More specifically, EchoStar tried to solve the problem and their system would not work... until they studied Tivo's system.
Today, on any linux box with a MPEG capture card I could type:
$ cat/dev/video > foo.mpg &
$ mplayer foo.mpg
(now hit spacebar to pause and unpause video)
...and I'd be violating this patent.
No, you would not.
Because you did not split the stream into it's video and audio components, and then reassemble them when called for while maintaining sync between the video and audio.
That is a major component of the patent, btw.
And that really is what this case is all about.
If you want to solve the problem, do it your own way... but don't do it the way Tivo did.
EchoStar worked on the problem, and didn't manage to figure out a solution until they studied Tivo's design. And, their solution mimics Tivo's solution.
So... berate the patent system all you want.
But, what EchoStar did was not right... by any yard stick.
If I was Tivo, I'd certainly do what was "legally necessary" to protect my patent.
But, it *could* be something as simple as granting a "free" license for GPL'd software.
On the other hand, even if they went totally nuculeer (as Bush would pronounce it)...
I'd be 100% satisfied with my current Myth system if they completely dropped the ability to watch TV while recording.
I simply don't watch live TV.
And, since my Myth system actually dumps files to an NFS server... on a completely different box... there is little chance of infringing the "watch recordings while recording" aspect of the patent.
No, it is because I am nothing like the stereotype that your behavior propagates.
Thus making it harder for others to figure out we are both from the same country... because *I* don't fit that stereotype. And the farther the "stereotypical" behavior deviates from my own the safer I feel in other countries.
I'm not exactly getting a "friendly Canadian" stereotype from you, since you opened by trying to call me names.
I'm not Canadian.
Actually, I was commenting on the attitude:
Even if the studies showing risk are true, I'm personally not going to change my behavior.
Not on the specific behavior.
The whole "I don't care about the facts* I'll still do what I think is right" thing is just so tireing.
That is what got me about your statement. It didn't matter what the facts turned out to be... you weren't changing.
As for the taxpayers you mention, I think my medical costs will pale in comparison to the costs inherent in seeing the world through national stereotypes.
I'm afraid I cannot return the compliment, though.
No worries. You just keep reinforcing that image. Makes it easier for me to convince people that I'm Canadian when I travel abroad...
...and enjoying things while you have them.
Because you won't have them as long when you do reckless things without a good reason.
There is a HUGE difference between living life (bungy jumping, rock climbing, parasailing) and just being stupid (unprotected sex with strangers, sharing needles, crossing the street without looking).
It isn't that hard to get a condom, buy your own needle and look before crossing the street.
Likewise, there are things that can EASILY be done to MITIGATE any POSSIBLE damage from cell phones.
I just wish there was some way to make sure the taxpayers didn't ever have to pay for your decision to "accept" the risk you so nonchalantly "assume".
This is the definition which matters as opposed to whatever some software company might like to define "release" to mean.
Well, since I was paraphrasing... I have to take any blame for the word "release".
And, in my original statement, I meant that MS would not give any of *thier* code to any party under a GPL license... and that they would not have to if they didn't give it to anyone.
They are more than happy to give away *other* people's code tho...
Just make sure your friends are the ones counting the votes...
But, to pull it off you have to make sure the local military is busy in another country. That way you can make it look like you are "building up the military" with increased budgets... but you are really syphoning off money from the treasury and running the military into the ground.
So, when everyone catches on... it is too late.
And if you get caught? Pardons all around!
(Gotta give them credit, it took a time to craft an education system that would produce citizens this stupid.)
The way it should work (in my opinion) is that if you want to patent something, you had better have something tangible to present with your filing. In this case, NTP only held a piece of paper saying they invented something. They did not write any code or develop any product (or component of a product). Essentially, there were only three possible sources of revenue for NTP: Investments, Licensing, and Lawsuits.
Personally, I think that the moment someone else comes up with a solution that infringes on a patent... without them referring to the patent (or any documentation / examples that copy the idea)... you've reached the point where the idea is "obvious to someone familiar with the field of study" and the patent should be terminated.
IMHO, this first to file stuff is BS. If two people come up with the same idea at the same time... then the idea isn't unique enough to deserve a patent.
Likewise, if you ask a programmer to solve a problem for you, and he sits down and slings out some code... it can't (shouldn't) be patent infringement because he is simply employing "common knowledge" and doing his damn job. "Clean room implementations always get a pass". At least that is how it should be.
Re:boot camp made me buy a mac
on
Going To Boot Camp
·
· Score: 3, Funny
looks like i'm officially a mac guy now
If you are, then I'm a lesbian because I like going down on chicks.
Point is... you have quite a ways to go. The first step is realizing that Windows is of no use to you *at* *all*.
When you make that step, then you'll be on your way to being a "mac guy".
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it must not be so clear if your example doesn't really do what they are claiming.
In claim one they say:Did you actually try your example? Go ahead, I'll wait...
Back yet?
OK... what happened when you got to the end of the file and "caught up" with the live recording...
I'll give you a hint: exiting... end of file
You see, Tivo has this nifty *variable* delay feature. And that is what they patented. And it covers little things like "catching up" to the live data stream (variable delay = 0) and having the stream continue to grow.
Your example doesn't do that. Playback stops when the delay = 0.
Tivo doesn't stop playing...
One concern I immediately had -- and I happily saw noted in the article as well -- is the question of who will pay to support this? Data storage isn't free, or cheap.
The concern I immediately had was... which companies do I need to buy stock in.
Because, as you said, storage isn't free. (or cheap in quantity)
no matter how "obvious" and "simple" people in this thread insist it is
Addendum: Have a look at this paying close attention to the ending...
I think one of the reasons they didn't include such functionality is pressure from broadcasters/advertisers.
BZZT!
What came out at the trial was that they *tried* to provide the functionality, but could not get it to work. (no matter how "obvious" and "simple" people in this thread insist it is)
They were only able to get it to work after studying Tivo's unit.
Much more the clincher in this case is that many of the things that TiVo claimed infringement on were things that they had exposed Dish to in licensing meetings that eventually failed.
More specifically, EchoStar tried to solve the problem and their system would not work... until they studied Tivo's system.
No, you would not.
Because you did not split the stream into it's video and audio components, and then reassemble them when called for while maintaining sync between the video and audio.
That is a major component of the patent, btw.
And that really is what this case is all about.
If you want to solve the problem, do it your own way... but don't do it the way Tivo did.
EchoStar worked on the problem, and didn't manage to figure out a solution until they studied Tivo's design. And, their solution mimics Tivo's solution.
So... berate the patent system all you want.
But, what EchoStar did was not right... by any yard stick.
Is MythTV next?
If I was Tivo, I'd certainly do what was "legally necessary" to protect my patent.
But, it *could* be something as simple as granting a "free" license for GPL'd software.
On the other hand, even if they went totally nuculeer (as Bush would pronounce it)...
I'd be 100% satisfied with my current Myth system if they completely dropped the ability to watch TV while recording.
I simply don't watch live TV.
And, since my Myth system actually dumps files to an NFS server... on a completely different box... there is little chance of infringing the "watch recordings while recording" aspect of the patent.
And I was kinda hoping they could give it to Bush and Cheney...
Since "life begins at inception" it would be a nice way around that whole "illegal to kill them" thing.
There is however ...
a dangerous situation i can think of: a system running windows that has access to linux system binaries through
samba or nfs
If you create a share to one of your binary directories (/usr/bin/) then you deserve what you get.
Especially if you do it in a way that compromises the fact that only root can write to those files...
No, it is because I am nothing like the stereotype that your behavior propagates.
Thus making it harder for others to figure out we are both from the same country... because *I* don't fit that stereotype. And the farther the "stereotypical" behavior deviates from my own the safer I feel in other countries.
I'm not exactly getting a "friendly Canadian" stereotype from you, since you opened by trying to call me names.
I'm not Canadian.
Actually, I was commenting on the attitude:Not on the specific behavior.
The whole "I don't care about the facts* I'll still do what I think is right" thing is just so tireing.
That is what got me about your statement. It didn't matter what the facts turned out to be... you weren't changing.
As for the taxpayers you mention, I think my medical costs will pale in comparison to the costs inherent in seeing the world through national stereotypes.
How unfortunately true...
*Whatever those may turn out to be.
I'm afraid I cannot return the compliment, though.
...and enjoying things while you have them.
No worries. You just keep reinforcing that image. Makes it easier for me to convince people that I'm Canadian when I travel abroad...
Because you won't have them as long when you do reckless things without a good reason.
There is a HUGE difference between living life (bungy jumping, rock climbing, parasailing) and just being stupid (unprotected sex with strangers, sharing needles, crossing the street without looking).
It isn't that hard to get a condom, buy your own needle and look before crossing the street.
Likewise, there are things that can EASILY be done to MITIGATE any POSSIBLE damage from cell phones.
I just wish there was some way to make sure the taxpayers didn't ever have to pay for your decision to "accept" the risk you so nonchalantly "assume".
haven't you heard?
It isn't bad for you any more...
Like press refresh on slashdot ever five minutes?
Dude... it's not THAT hard to make your proxy insert a refresh statement into the html.
Hell, you could probably write a greasemonkey script to do it...
Even if the studies showing risk are true, I'm personally not going to change my behavior.
You sound like an (U.S.) american.
The cell phone is a useful enough device for me personally to accept the health risks, and I imagine this is true of most heavy users.
Because living and good health is over-rated?
Especially when it comes to proper brain function... apparently.
Shouldn't "admin" be capitalized? I mean, there seem to be plenty of sysadmins out there who think they're God....
Admins don't care if you capitalize it or not.
Just like god doesn't care what athiest think. (or whether I capitalize god or not)
The ones that care are a bunch of piss-ants trying to make points with those that are better than they are.
BTW, you sound jealous...
This is the definition which matters as opposed to whatever some software company might like to define "release" to mean.
Well, since I was paraphrasing... I have to take any blame for the word "release".
And, in my original statement, I meant that MS would not give any of *thier* code to any party under a GPL license... and that they would not have to if they didn't give it to anyone.
They are more than happy to give away *other* people's code tho...
I said RELEASES... not DISTRIBUTES.
As in: modifies the code and let's others have it under a GPL (license... but that would be redundant).
That's called a coup.
In 'merica we call them elections.
Just make sure your friends are the ones counting the votes...
But, to pull it off you have to make sure the local military is busy in another country. That way you can make it look like you are "building up the military" with increased budgets... but you are really syphoning off money from the treasury and running the military into the ground.
So, when everyone catches on... it is too late.
And if you get caught? Pardons all around!
(Gotta give them credit, it took a time to craft an education system that would produce citizens this stupid.)
How do they ensure that none of that source doesn't leak into MS products?
By realizing it doesn't really matter if you don't ever let anyone see that particular piece of code?
Ever wonder why they *really* don't ever "share" enough of the code to compile the whole thing and compary signatures of the binaries...
Isn't this kind of like Stalin asking for input on the democratic process
Well, MS isn't asking anyone anything... they are "providing information".
Their intent is to make the "information" look legitimate by having a huge resource that they could use for "research" if they really wanted to.
So... a more appropriate analogy would be:
Asking Satan for the best way to get into heaven.
In the end you really have to consider the true intentions of the source of the information.
The GPL basically says they don't have to release one bit of code if they keep everything internal.
And hell really will freeze over before MS releases GPL code.
So... they won't have one bit of problem "complying" with the GPL in this instance.
The way it should work (in my opinion) is that if you want to patent something, you had better have something tangible to present with your filing. In this case, NTP only held a piece of paper saying they invented something. They did not write any code or develop any product (or component of a product). Essentially, there were only three possible sources of revenue for NTP: Investments, Licensing, and Lawsuits.
Personally, I think that the moment someone else comes up with a solution that infringes on a patent... without them referring to the patent (or any documentation / examples that copy the idea)... you've reached the point where the idea is "obvious to someone familiar with the field of study" and the patent should be terminated.
IMHO, this first to file stuff is BS. If two people come up with the same idea at the same time... then the idea isn't unique enough to deserve a patent.
Likewise, if you ask a programmer to solve a problem for you, and he sits down and slings out some code... it can't (shouldn't) be patent infringement because he is simply employing "common knowledge" and doing his damn job. "Clean room implementations always get a pass". At least that is how it should be.
looks like i'm officially a mac guy now
If you are, then I'm a lesbian because I like going down on chicks.
Point is... you have quite a ways to go. The first step is realizing that Windows is of no use to you *at* *all*.
When you make that step, then you'll be on your way to being a "mac guy".
Right now, all you are is a mac *owner*.
Minnesota was closer to being red in the latest election than almost any time in the last century
Couldn't that be said for most states during the last election?
It'd probably be possible to port Gnome to C++/Qt, or KDE to C/GTK.
;-)
Just rewrite every thing in Perl!