Well you could just not claim that they are infringing unless you know for a fact they are infringing, that is why this verdict came down. If you dont make the claim they cannot file for a judgement.
No they wouldnt. If I got x amount of money per y, then you maximize y to maximize x, so the more patent apps that cross their desk the more they get paid, which means that if I DONT do my job, and just pass or fail on a whim the more money I get paid, add in just enough work to get it done and pass a review..
It would be better to pay them enough to live plus a bonus, but they lose x% of their bonus for each patent that comes back invalidated, that would make them want to work.
Because no one ever tries to challenge facts, ever....
Also the court did not say it was perfectly clear previously, just that this is how it is, so deal with it.
Yea, if you google CLA you dont remotely get what it means in 5 seconds, maybe a few minutes after you get past the Certified Linux Admin and many others.
I think the problem is that you come up with a new patent-able idea it takes more than 2 years to get it to market due to the FDA and the like, meaning that they get no protection at all in the market.. They are things that probably should be done by the government, but we are in a free market thing.
Or maybe it is because the exploits they were using were made specifically for Windows, and not Linux . If the entire system was Linux it may have been harder all around to get the data.
Except show me where it incentives.. You have kids out of wedlock you will be stuck poor with no disposable income for the rest of your life... That sure does not sound like incentives to me.
Actually they shit on the poor directly as well.. Cutting the benefits without have a system in place to raise those people up does not just shit on the system, it shits on the people.
It is not an appeal to emotion..If he had stopped with it is heatless you would be correct, but he expanded it to "it is inefficient, because starving people will do anything to not starve, especially in a country like the USA with ample resources everywhere", which makes it into a situation to stop things like riots.
What financial incentive? Welfare gives you no net benefits when you have kids. Sure they feed you at a marginal level, and help keep a roof over your head, but they dont provide the full costs of the kid...
You are correct, however I would believe that most of the poor births are not by choice, unless you consider that they did not have an abortion choice.. In fact a study cited in 2008 showed that 2/3 of the poor's children are unintentional. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-Unintended-Pregnancy-US.html#6
The problem is not minimum wage.. I leave liberal on many things, but that just does not add up. Increasing minimum wage will not raise these peoples standards of living, it will stay the same, or even go down,.This is because if you raise the labor costs, it will raise the item costs, this will in turn cause inflation, and this does not include those who will use the opportunity to raise the prices even further if they can.
You cannot just raise min wage in a capitalistic society and think that will just fix it.
Repeal what is considered an inalienable right and you no longer have inalienable right... If you repel the second then what is to stop them from doing it to 1-27 as well. Remember this is one of the original bill of rights, not just an amendment that was added later. l
Slashdot Mirror
Except that is really both parties. The parties come out against things like this, but they dont ever do anything about it.
Well you could just not claim that they are infringing unless you know for a fact they are infringing, that is why this verdict came down. If you dont make the claim they cannot file for a judgement.
No they wouldnt. If I got x amount of money per y, then you maximize y to maximize x, so the more patent apps that cross their desk the more they get paid, which means that if I DONT do my job, and just pass or fail on a whim the more money I get paid, add in just enough work to get it done and pass a review.. It would be better to pay them enough to live plus a bonus, but they lose x% of their bonus for each patent that comes back invalidated, that would make them want to work.
Why would they not? If the corp loses they pay the fees... It makes sense...
Actually MS will be able to keep the money because it was an agreement. It would be next to impossible to get more money though.
Because no one ever tries to challenge facts, ever.... Also the court did not say it was perfectly clear previously, just that this is how it is, so deal with it.
Yea, if you google CLA you dont remotely get what it means in 5 seconds, maybe a few minutes after you get past the Certified Linux Admin and many others.
Everywhere outside the US
Left|right
US
no1|dems|-repub|teapartyers
So he wins the lottery 3 times a year?
I think the problem is that you come up with a new patent-able idea it takes more than 2 years to get it to market due to the FDA and the like, meaning that they get no protection at all in the market.. They are things that probably should be done by the government, but we are in a free market thing.
Algorithms are maths, maths cannot be patented.
And? How many computer software are new ideas, I can think of none...Taking 2 existaing things and putting them together is not a new idea, http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/09/15/1958239/the-man-who-created-the-pencil-eraser-and-how-patents-have-changed
Or maybe it is because the exploits they were using were made specifically for Windows, and not Linux . If the entire system was Linux it may have been harder all around to get the data.
Society in general is a giant pyramid scheme, no matter the economy.
Except show me where it incentives.. You have kids out of wedlock you will be stuck poor with no disposable income for the rest of your life... That sure does not sound like incentives to me.
Actually they shit on the poor directly as well.. Cutting the benefits without have a system in place to raise those people up does not just shit on the system, it shits on the people.
It is not an appeal to emotion..If he had stopped with it is heatless you would be correct, but he expanded it to "it is inefficient, because starving people will do anything to not starve, especially in a country like the USA with ample resources everywhere", which makes it into a situation to stop things like riots.
and rapidly climbing...
What financial incentive? Welfare gives you no net benefits when you have kids. Sure they feed you at a marginal level, and help keep a roof over your head, but they dont provide the full costs of the kid...
You are correct, however I would believe that most of the poor births are not by choice, unless you consider that they did not have an abortion choice.. In fact a study cited in 2008 showed that 2/3 of the poor's children are unintentional. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/FB-Unintended-Pregnancy-US.html#6
Because having 5 kids for welfare nets you anything...
You cannot just raise min wage in a capitalistic society and think that will just fix it.
Claims not completely proven != completely disproven...
To be honest they make the billions and then give it to the teams, who pay taxes on it.
Repeal what is considered an inalienable right and you no longer have inalienable right... If you repel the second then what is to stop them from doing it to 1-27 as well. Remember this is one of the original bill of rights, not just an amendment that was added later. l