During the time that I've been on/., I went from workng on the net in the Valley to law school and am now a patent attorney. So take this with an appropriately sized grain of salt:
Parent's suggesion that "part of the fees...could be paid on an installment basis over the life of the patent" precisely describes the way it already works. Besides the examination and other fees necessary to get a patent to issuance, non-trivial fees apply periodically over the life of a patent that allow the patentee to keep it in force.
GP's assertion that hiring a qualified examiner corps would necessarily increase the average person's tax bill is (probably) wrong, but not in the way s/he thinks. Right now, the United States Patent and Trademark Office runs a surplus: it brings in more revenue from fees paid by would-be and actual patent holders than the cost of running the office. Congress has chosen to divert money from those fees away from the PTO and put it to other purposes. Even if the USPTO only got to keep all of the fees that patent holders pay, a larger or more qualified examiner corps (or both) would be possible. And, on the whole, if Congress would commit to allowing the USPTO to keep 100% of a fee increase, I suspect that most of the patent community would support an increase. The delays in patent issuance and the (actual and/or perceived) quality problems with the examination process hurt patentees where it hurts.
Re:He's a what? He's a what?
on
The Music Man
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I am not too familiar with copyright law, but my father told me that when you become the owner of a recording that noone else has, you gain the rights to reproduce and sell said recording.
Your father was wrong.
There have been several precedents of this.
Name one.
ps: IAAL, but this post is intended merely as public education about copyright law and does not create an attorney/client relationship with djdavetrouble, or anyone else who reads it. Please consult with an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction if you have any questions about the law as it applies to you.
At least in the US, your statement of the law is wrong. Purchase of a piece of physical media does not specifically provide you any rights to make copies of copyrighted works held on that media.
The irony is that the color yellow -- or, at least, one specific shade of yellow, is a registered US trademark. The product for which it is registered? 3M (tm) Post-Its (tm).
While I am a lawyer, this comment does _not_ contain legal advice for you to follow and it is not intended to form an attorney client relationship with you (chrome) or any one else who happens to read it. I am ethically required to urge you to consult with a lawyer who is admitted to the bar in your state (assuming that you live in the US) so that you may have comptent legal advice. Now, with that said:
As a general matter of law, you _are_ entitled to rely on a person's statement. And, when a person is a properly authorized representative (officer/director/etc.), you can also take their word as binding on their corporation. Google on "estoppel" for more infomation if you're curious.
They may be legally required to use ALL CAPS in license clauses disclaiming warranties. !IANAL. YMMV by state, although I think this one is due to a federal law.
At least in the U.S., you can't say "Patent Pending" until you (or, much more likely, your Patent Agent or Patent Attorney) have filed a Patent Application with the PTO.
I'd happily take that bet. Except that I'd bet even more money that AMD will not ever "ship" an 800mhz version of the Hammer.
I will happily take a bet from you (non-anon) that mhz for mhz, the Hammer will outperform the P4 or current IA64 chip at the time of the Hammer's release.
I'm sure that I'm going to get flamed, but what the heck. I've been on the net since '87 (no, that's not a typo) and decided that this IP law stuff was getting important. So, now I am a lawyer who practices IP law.
Your first premise isn't quite right. A patent is a right to exclude others. It is granted by the government in exchange for teaching others about your invention. Software patents are often written in very generic terms -- I've not yet seen one with example code in it. Why? TMTOWTDI. (Ok, so I used to get paid to code Perl -- shoot me.)
1.1. True, but note the "may" 2. If by "successful" you mean the application was granted and a patent issued, then yes. (Assuming the subject matter wasn't classified for national security reasons or some such.) 2.1 True, if there was sample code. I won't there has never been sample code, but it's not bloody likely.
3. Close enough. 3.1 Hmmm. That patentee has the right to exclude others (under US law) from making or using the invention.
Translating the patent application -- sure, it is a public document.
Code may be speech, but not all speech is code;-}
It's not _illegal_ per se; a patentee has the right to exclude you from using his/her patented invention.
publishing? Sure: www.uspto.gov
Some form of system? Yup, it's called Federal court. If you're the patentee and I'm violating your rights, you can sue me in Federal court. (Again, I'm assuming US law here.) But a system for prior-restraint? Nope.
I completely fail to understand how you made the leap to the last element in your syllogism.
Sadly, the previous poster hasn't updated his software in some time. The current version of netatalk allows three different encryption schemes, one of which is triple DES.
Should be secure enough for him...
Human Genome Data Assembled on Linux Cluster
on
Genetic Stone Soup
·
· Score: 3
From http://genome.ucsc.edu/goldenPath/algo.html:
Assembly Process Overview
The assembly proceeds according to the following major steps:
Decontaminating and repeat masking the sequence.
Alignment of mRNA, EST, BAC end, and paired plasmid reads against genomic fragments. On a cluster of one hundred 800 MhZ Pentium III CPUs running Linux this takes about three days.
Creating an input directory structure with using Washington University map and other data. This step takes about an hour on a single computer.
For each fingerprint clone contig, aligning the fragments within that contig against each other. This takes about three hours on the cluster.
Using the GigAssembler program within each fingerprint clone contig to merge overlapping fragments and to order and orient the resulting sequence contigs into scaffolds. This takes about two hours on the cluster.
Combining the contig assemblies into full chromosome assemblies. This takes about twenty minutes on one computer.
The steps will be described in more detail below.
[snip]
The program was NOT written in "assembler". From Appendix B:
mRNA Scoring Function
int scoreMrnaPsl(struct psl *ali, boolean isEst)
/* Return score for one mRNA oriented psl. */
{
int milliBad;
int score;
Slashdot Mirror
During the time that I've been on /., I went from workng on the net in the Valley to law school and am now a patent attorney. So take this with an appropriately sized grain of salt:
Parent's suggesion that "part of the fees...could be paid on an installment basis over the life of the patent" precisely describes the way it already works. Besides the examination and other fees necessary to get a patent to issuance, non-trivial fees apply periodically over the life of a patent that allow the patentee to keep it in force.
GP's assertion that hiring a qualified examiner corps would necessarily increase the average person's tax bill is (probably) wrong, but not in the way s/he thinks. Right now, the United States Patent and Trademark Office runs a surplus: it brings in more revenue from fees paid by would-be and actual patent holders than the cost of running the office. Congress has chosen to divert money from those fees away from the PTO and put it to other purposes. Even if the USPTO only got to keep all of the fees that patent holders pay, a larger or more qualified examiner corps (or both) would be possible. And, on the whole, if Congress would commit to allowing the USPTO to keep 100% of a fee increase, I suspect that most of the patent community would support an increase. The delays in patent issuance and the (actual and/or perceived) quality problems with the examination process hurt patentees where it hurts.
Your father was wrong.
There have been several precedents of this.
Name one.
ps: IAAL, but this post is intended merely as public education about copyright law and does not create an attorney/client relationship with djdavetrouble, or anyone else who reads it. Please consult with an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction if you have any questions about the law as it applies to you.
At least in the US, your statement of the law is wrong. Purchase of a piece of physical media does not specifically provide you any rights to make copies of copyrighted works held on that media.
UTSL. You might actually want to read the relevant bit of law before making (potentially) incriminating remarks. For instance, here are the exclusive rights of the copyright holder (not the media buyer) and the statutory fair use rights of all persons (including the media buyer) under Federal law.
The irony is that the color yellow -- or, at least, one specific shade of yellow, is a registered US trademark. The product for which it is registered? 3M (tm) Post-Its (tm).
While I am a lawyer, this comment does _not_ contain legal advice for you to follow and it is not intended to form an attorney client relationship with you (chrome) or any one else who happens to read it. I am ethically required to urge you to consult with a lawyer who is admitted to the bar in your state (assuming that you live in the US) so that you may have comptent legal advice. Now, with that said:
As a general matter of law, you _are_ entitled to rely on a person's statement. And, when a person is a properly authorized representative (officer/director/etc.), you can also take their word as binding on their corporation. Google on "estoppel" for more infomation if you're curious.
They may be legally required to use ALL CAPS in license clauses disclaiming warranties. !IANAL. YMMV by state, although I think this one is due to a federal law.
!IANAL
At least in the U.S., you can't say "Patent Pending" until you (or, much more likely, your Patent Agent or Patent Attorney) have filed a Patent Application with the PTO.
You said that:
3 /index.html
My friend has a G3 Powerbook, and it is nearly unusable, and that is with 1 GB of RAM!
I beg to differ: no G3 PowerBook can take 1G of RAM. Source: http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/powerbook_g
Sorry. Thanks for playing, Mr. Troll.
I'd happily take that bet. Except that I'd bet even more money that AMD will not ever "ship" an 800mhz version of the Hammer.
I will happily take a bet from you (non-anon) that mhz for mhz, the Hammer will outperform the P4 or current IA64 chip at the time of the Hammer's release.
I'm sure that I'm going to get flamed, but what the heck. I've been on the net since '87 (no, that's not a typo) and decided that this IP law stuff was getting important. So, now I am a lawyer who practices IP law.
;-}
Your first premise isn't quite right. A patent is a right to exclude others. It is granted by the government in exchange for teaching others about your invention. Software patents are often written in very generic terms -- I've not yet seen one with example code in it. Why? TMTOWTDI. (Ok, so I used to get paid to code Perl -- shoot me.)
1.1. True, but note the "may"
2. If by "successful" you mean the application was granted and a patent issued, then yes. (Assuming the subject matter wasn't classified for national security reasons or some such.)
2.1 True, if there was sample code. I won't there has never been sample code, but it's not bloody likely.
3. Close enough.
3.1 Hmmm. That patentee has the right to exclude others (under US law) from making or using the invention.
Translating the patent application -- sure, it is a public document.
Code may be speech, but not all speech is code
It's not _illegal_ per se; a patentee has the right to exclude you from using his/her patented invention.
publishing? Sure: www.uspto.gov
Some form of system? Yup, it's called Federal court. If you're the patentee and I'm violating your rights, you can sue me in Federal court. (Again, I'm assuming US law here.) But a system for prior-restraint? Nope.
I completely fail to understand how you made the leap to the last element in your syllogism.
Sadly, the previous poster hasn't updated his software in some time. The current version of netatalk allows three different encryption schemes, one of which is triple DES. Should be secure enough for him...
From http://genome.ucsc.edu/goldenPath/algo.html:
Assembly Process Overview
The assembly proceeds according to the following major steps:
Decontaminating and repeat masking the sequence.
Alignment of mRNA, EST, BAC end, and paired plasmid reads against genomic fragments. On a cluster of one hundred 800 MhZ Pentium III CPUs running Linux this takes about three days.
Creating an input directory structure with using Washington University map and other data. This step takes about an hour on a single computer.
For each fingerprint clone contig, aligning the fragments within that contig against each other. This takes about three hours on the cluster.
Using the GigAssembler program within each fingerprint clone contig to merge overlapping fragments and to order and orient the resulting sequence contigs into scaffolds. This takes about two hours on the cluster.
Combining the contig assemblies into full chromosome assemblies. This takes about twenty minutes on one computer.
The steps will be described in more detail below.
[snip]
The program was NOT written in "assembler". From Appendix B:
mRNA Scoring Function
int scoreMrnaPsl(struct psl *ali, boolean isEst)
/* Return score for one mRNA oriented psl. */
{
int milliBad;
int score;
milliBad = calcMilliBad(ali, TRUE);
score = 25*log(1+ali->match) + log(1+ali->repMatch) - 10*milliBad + 10;
if (ali->match <= 10)
score -= (10-ali->match)*25;
if (isEst)
score -= 25;
else
score += 25;
return score;
}