The company might be dead on paper, but the trademark is marked 'Live' at USPTO. Both Android trademarks have been filled under same service category, that really means 'collision' from the Office point of view.
The trademark is live on paper but dead in reality. I don't think the former owner of "Android Data" has a case; with trademarks, actual use in commerce is more important than the formality of registration.
That leaves aside whether there's actually serious possibility of confusion between e-commerce software and a mobile phone operating system.
Evidentally you've been living in a cave. Remember the big flap about AT&T putting in special rooms for NSA to tap traffic from? Those rooms were in the US, and the traffic was not limited to international traffic by any means.
You know, I'm pretty sure neither the Bible nor the Koran say anything about talking about "pigs", or "swine", or any other unclean or treyfe animals. Just because you aren't supposed to eat the animal doesn't mean you aren't supposed to say the word!
Honestly, if you want to compare American and Canadian laws, copyright laws are the bottom of the list in terms of impact and relevency. There are WAY more important laws that clearly shows Canada's are generally more enlightened and less restrictive compared to their American counterparts.
Right. Like the Canadian content laws or the hate propaganda laws.
That's from the current page. You still can't (according to their rules) take an application initially developed with the LGPL version of Qt and put it under the commercial license. Probably a vestige of when Trolltech was independent and wanted to make sure they got the license money up front, but it's still there.
My alternative hypothesis is that working-age people have been dying of it mostly because it's working-age people who were initially exposed to it (through some as-yet-unknown mechanism), not because they're particularly susceptible. It's just a hypothesis, though. If it holds, then as the flu spreads, the distribution of deaths should become more typical of flu.
Morales has no intention of leaving the lithium on the ground.
That depends on whether he's a true believer socialist or an ordinary kleptocrat. In the latter case, he'll sell the lithium rights and enrich himself and his cronies in the process. In the former case, he'll effectively leave it on the ground.
But the second you want to distribute it, anything that the GPL considers a derivative work becomes GPL. And *that* is why some people, like myself, prefer to avoid GPL.
No. The definition of "derivative work" is that of copyright law, not of the GPL. The GPL cannot and does not define "derivative work".
IMO, if the only part of a GPLed work included in mine is basic linkage information and a few constant values, my work isn't a derivative work of the GPLed work. This is the typical case with dynamic linkage of a self-contained library. But IANAL.
The thing is, if you build your application around Qt you lose the flexibility to someday sell the thing without having to buy a commercial license.
It's even worse: "You must purchase a Qt Commercial License from Qt Software or from one of its authorized resellers before you start developing commercial software. The Commercial license does not allow the incorporation of code developed with the Qt GNU LGPL v. 2.1 or GNU GPL v. 3.0 license versions into a commercial product."
That's a ridiculous rule (and impossible to enforce for code kept in-house prior to the switch), but it's there.
Support is good. But maybe you should also be sending them a warning of what coal mining has done to your area?
Imagine what West Virginia would be like _without_ coal mining, however. Very pretty, I'm sure. But certainly far poorer.
Same goes for Bolivia. They want to preserve the natural beauty of their salt flats or stick it to the developed countries or whatever, they can do so. But that lithium will do them no good in the ground.
I ran across this train of thought in another thread, and I disagree with it - there is nothing stopping someone archiving works of art today, and waiting until copyright expires to make them available later on.
The technology to archive works for that long doesn't exist. Sure, it would work for a few billion years, but the expansion of the sun would be a big problem, and if you get around that, the heat death of the universe is pretty much impossible to beat.
How can you be sure, Mr. Deckard? Failed any CAPTCHAs recently?
Yeah, I was trying to download something from Google Books. I swore it said "android", but my wife claimed it said "replicant". Neither worked. Showed it to a neighbor and he passed it with "human". That means the estate of Philip K. Dick is suing him instead, so it's just as well.
BTW, to the ACs duplicating my original post: The way to do it would be to post at the same level as mine, not as a reply to mine; the latter sort of gives the game away. Oh, and it would be more impressive if you'd posted before me... at least to me.
It might happen, or the patents may prove to be claimed too narrowly to be invalidated easily. How broad does a patent covering VFAT have to make it difficult for competitors to interact with VFAT and still be a novel, non-obvious solution?
It doesn't matter. The reviews for prior art and the determination of patent infringement are separate. What seems to happen is that the patent is read narrowly when looking for a conflict with prior art, and broadly when looking for infringement. So the patent office and courts can simultaneously hold that a piece of prior art does not invalidate the patent, and that a particular device that uses something substantially similar to that same prior art is infringing.
The authors' guild doesn't represent all authors, and it may well not even represent most authors. (I'll grant it probably represents all the authors in the English speaking world who make most of their income from writing.[...])
I don't even think it does that; for instance, I don't think genre authors are typically Authors Guild members.
The courts have an easy way out of this one. They'll declare there's no "case or controversy" and dismiss the complaint, just like they did when the RIAA threatned Dr. Felten over releasing watermarking information.
The only way to get heard in court when someone sends you a C&D is to fail to desist, and let them sue you. Of course, given the other side has far more resources, that's kind of like taking up Dirty Harry on his "Do you feel lucky, punk?" challenge.
I once was on a Fido forum with someone who would often write responses nearly word-for-word identical to mine. It was uncanny; I'd see his post and recognize my own writing, only to realize it wasn't mine. Timestamps would sometimes show my post was written first, sometimes his. I imagine some others on the forum thought at least one of us was a sock puppet, but neither of us was.
(If he's on slashdot, he's probably composing a post just like this one)
That probably happens rarely. But build a big enough database, and it will happen often. Particularly given the restricted problem domains in undergraduate papers. It's not just a computer problem; even humans will think "plagiarism" when they see two papers with similar ideas and similar turns of phrase. Which I think demonstrates that plagiarism cannot be established satisfactorily merely by showing similarity between papers.
Something I've always wondered - why don't cell providers have some kind of emergency mode that blocks calls but allows text messages?
I know you can't place phone calls when the cell service gets overloaded, but why overload it in the first place? Text messages are tiny, and thousands to tens of thousands per second are not going to crash the system. It'd let all the people contact their families without overloading the network.
Text messages use the same channel as call setup. It's quite possible that IS, in fact, the bottleneck.
Even a plane slamming into the skyscraper you're currently inhabiting isn't that big of a cause for alarm. An orderly evacuation is recommended, but any decent architect will tell you that those steel-and-concrete buildings are designed to withstand the impact of several 747s.
If you're going for "famous last words", you're over 7 years late.
You thought those talking birthday cards were annoying? Just try walking in the mall as all 100,000 posters located in random locations start talking all at once, producing the noise which finally wakens those who must not be named and end reality as we believed it to be.
Won't last long, thanks to vandals and security guards who fail to see them. Unless they use deaf mall cops, anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
The trademark is live on paper but dead in reality. I don't think the former owner of "Android Data" has a case; with trademarks, actual use in commerce is more important than the formality of registration.
That leaves aside whether there's actually serious possibility of confusion between e-commerce software and a mobile phone operating system.
Evidentally you've been living in a cave. Remember the big flap about AT&T putting in special rooms for NSA to tap traffic from? Those rooms were in the US, and the traffic was not limited to international traffic by any means.
The FDA will be there shortly to confiscate your unlicensed penicillin.
"Tyranny, tempered by incompetence"
You know, I'm pretty sure neither the Bible nor the Koran say anything about talking about "pigs", or "swine", or any other unclean or treyfe animals. Just because you aren't supposed to eat the animal doesn't mean you aren't supposed to say the word!
> CLOSE BORDER
With what, the Berlin Wall?
> YES
That's no longer available.
Right. Like the Canadian content laws or the hate propaganda laws.
(oops)
Or they've found a distinguisher for XTS-mode encrypted data.
That's from the current page. You still can't (according to their rules) take an application initially developed with the LGPL version of Qt and put it under the commercial license. Probably a vestige of when Trolltech was independent and wanted to make sure they got the license money up front, but it's still there.
My alternative hypothesis is that working-age people have been dying of it mostly because it's working-age people who were initially exposed to it (through some as-yet-unknown mechanism), not because they're particularly susceptible. It's just a hypothesis, though. If it holds, then as the flu spreads, the distribution of deaths should become more typical of flu.
That depends on whether he's a true believer socialist or an ordinary kleptocrat. In the latter case, he'll sell the lithium rights and enrich himself and his cronies in the process. In the former case, he'll effectively leave it on the ground.
If the library is LGPL, it allows that. The LGPL has a few other requirements, but it does allow that.
No. The definition of "derivative work" is that of copyright law, not of the GPL. The GPL cannot and does not define "derivative work".
IMO, if the only part of a GPLed work included in mine is basic linkage information and a few constant values, my work isn't a derivative work of the GPLed work. This is the typical case with dynamic linkage of a self-contained library. But IANAL.
It's even worse: "You must purchase a Qt Commercial License from Qt Software or from one of its authorized resellers before you start developing commercial software. The Commercial license does not allow the incorporation of code developed with the Qt GNU LGPL v. 2.1 or GNU GPL v. 3.0 license versions into a commercial product."
That's a ridiculous rule (and impossible to enforce for code kept in-house prior to the switch), but it's there.
Imagine what West Virginia would be like _without_ coal mining, however. Very pretty, I'm sure. But certainly far poorer.
Same goes for Bolivia. They want to preserve the natural beauty of their salt flats or stick it to the developed countries or whatever, they can do so. But that lithium will do them no good in the ground.
The technology to archive works for that long doesn't exist. Sure, it would work for a few billion years, but the expansion of the sun would be a big problem, and if you get around that, the heat death of the universe is pretty much impossible to beat.
Yeah, I was trying to download something from Google Books. I swore it said "android", but my wife claimed it said "replicant". Neither worked. Showed it to a neighbor and he passed it with "human". That means the estate of Philip K. Dick is suing him instead, so it's just as well.
BTW, to the ACs duplicating my original post: The way to do it would be to post at the same level as mine, not as a reply to mine; the latter sort of gives the game away. Oh, and it would be more impressive if you'd posted before me... at least to me.
It doesn't matter. The reviews for prior art and the determination of patent infringement are separate. What seems to happen is that the patent is read narrowly when looking for a conflict with prior art, and broadly when looking for infringement. So the patent office and courts can simultaneously hold that a piece of prior art does not invalidate the patent, and that a particular device that uses something substantially similar to that same prior art is infringing.
I don't even think it does that; for instance, I don't think genre authors are typically Authors Guild members.
Then you've reinvented virtual machines.
The courts have an easy way out of this one. They'll declare there's no "case or controversy" and dismiss the complaint, just like they did when the RIAA threatned Dr. Felten over releasing watermarking information.
The only way to get heard in court when someone sends you a C&D is to fail to desist, and let them sue you. Of course, given the other side has far more resources, that's kind of like taking up Dirty Harry on his "Do you feel lucky, punk?" challenge.
I once was on a Fido forum with someone who would often write responses nearly word-for-word identical to mine. It was uncanny; I'd see his post and recognize my own writing, only to realize it wasn't mine. Timestamps would sometimes show my post was written first, sometimes his. I imagine some others on the forum thought at least one of us was a sock puppet, but neither of us was.
(If he's on slashdot, he's probably composing a post just like this one)
That probably happens rarely. But build a big enough database, and it will happen often. Particularly given the restricted problem domains in undergraduate papers. It's not just a computer problem; even humans will think "plagiarism" when they see two papers with similar ideas and similar turns of phrase. Which I think demonstrates that plagiarism cannot be established satisfactorily merely by showing similarity between papers.
Text messages use the same channel as call setup. It's quite possible that IS, in fact, the bottleneck.
If you're going for "famous last words", you're over 7 years late.
Won't last long, thanks to vandals and security guards who fail to see them. Unless they use deaf mall cops, anyway.