Please, RIM was given a million chances to settle this case, both before and during trial. From accurate news reports concerning this case, RIM comes off as arrogant assholes in the whole process until the end, when the court finally says "Pay Up!"
And now they're complaining!? I don't buy it.
The patent system is working fine. Yes, it needs a few tweaks, but in this case RIM reaped what they sowed.
Spend all of the ILL Govt's money defending no-win lawsuits, so they can't afford any further investigations of corruption into his office. Brilliant!!
1st to file means no more interference practice at the USPTO - 2 companies no longer get to argue about "who invented it first."
The US is one of the few (if only) remaining countries that uses a "first to invent" system.
It does NOT mean 1st to file gets awarded a patent in spite of prior art. You can still invalidate a patent issued to the "first person to file." But once a first person files, no one else can get a patent for that same invention even if they invented it first, since they were not "first to file."
Actually, that's not entirely true.
The DMCA makes it illegal to break an encryption scheme to get at protected content. So it depends on if the GB games are encrypted at all on the cart.
Its legal under the DMCA for an individual to break USE restrictions, but not encryption to get to protected content.
Check out class 273 at the USPTO: [List of Patents for class 273 subclass 236] 236 BOARD GAMES, PIECES, OR BOARDS THEREFOR:
This subclass is indented under the class definition. Games or game structure wherein a competitive and amusing contest of skill or chance is engaged in by two or more participants using one or more surfaces having a pattern or confining region with which at least one contest element or the equivalent thereof is intended to cooperate, and where the results of the contest can be indicated according to definite rules (e.g., scoring).
Except that most people using iTunes aren't using P2P apps like eMule or Grokster.
A user still is paying the 99c/song to download the music. This app is simply allows the user to exercise his own ideas of what constitutes fair use in light of the current law, instead of being forced into Apple's definition of fair use.
I don't think this will affect the music industry or iTunes in the least.
I've actually been working in the IP Law / tech. industry for quite a few years representing a couple different large technology companies.
I will throw you a bone and agree that Sony is difficult to negotiate with. They seem to need to get permission from too many units of their business before signing off on something.
However, I think you're WAY off on Sony actively asserting their US patent portfolio. I've gotten "offers to license" on a regular basis from other companies, but have yet to get one from Sony. Neither have I heard any rumblings amongst my cohorts along those lines.
From what point of view are you speaking from?? (how do you work closely with these two companies?)
You are confusing the issue here. It has nothing to do with search results produced by the search engine. Rather, the decision affects ads presented to the user based on the word typed in. These are ads that the company behind the search engine has sold based on the keyword entered. (for example, if Google sells the keyword "playboy" to Penthouse, so that an advertisement to Penthouse shows up every time someone enters the keyword "playboy").
The decision does not affect and does not make illegal the hypothetical you stated above.
What are the chances of us Cingular customers getting reimursed for any of this down time ??
At 0.49 / minute, they owe me about $40 for the weekend...
Well, if you use the internet, then you seem to fall under the umbrella of U.S. jurisdiction. Im sure its illegal to post certain material that we would find to be ok in other countries, but thats alright. Try to do that the other way around and you'll get yer ass handed to you by the DMCA.
No, the only reason that Skylarov got his ass in jail is because he broke a US law (albeit a shitty one), then he came to America to give a speech. As soon as you step foot in America, you come under it's laws. It's very simple, if you break American laws, don't step foot in the country. Otherwise, do whatever your respective country allows.
That is an awesome idea! Let's see, we need to create a "fuck the RIAA" fund...
Time to Donate to the EFF Again
on
SSSCA Hearing
·
· Score: 1
This is only happening because the politicians are getting a huge wad of cash from special interests, and chances are any of us techno-geeks have yet to contribute to a political campaign.
Money talks. I'm hoping with the passage of campaign finance reform, maybe we'll see that toned down a little bit. But in the meantime, looks like we'll have to fight this one out in the courts again. Click below to donate to the EFF, they need cash to represent us effectively!
Slashdot Mirror
What's up with all the Sony bashing lately?
This just goes to show that the Consumer Electronics division still puts out great products!
Please, RIM was given a million chances to settle this case, both before and during trial. From accurate news reports concerning this case, RIM comes off as arrogant assholes in the whole process until the end, when the court finally says "Pay Up!"
And now they're complaining!? I don't buy it.
The patent system is working fine. Yes, it needs a few tweaks, but in this case RIM reaped what they sowed.
Spend all of the ILL Govt's money defending no-win lawsuits, so they can't afford any further investigations of corruption into his office. Brilliant!!
1st to file means no more interference practice at the USPTO - 2 companies no longer get to argue about "who invented it first."
The US is one of the few (if only) remaining countries that uses a "first to invent" system.
It does NOT mean 1st to file gets awarded a patent in spite of prior art. You can still invalidate a patent issued to the "first person to file." But once a first person files, no one else can get a patent for that same invention even if they invented it first, since they were not "first to file."
Actually, that's not entirely true. The DMCA makes it illegal to break an encryption scheme to get at protected content. So it depends on if the GB games are encrypted at all on the cart. Its legal under the DMCA for an individual to break USE restrictions, but not encryption to get to protected content.
Games are entirely patentable.
Check out class 273 at the USPTO:
[List of Patents for class 273 subclass 236] 236 BOARD GAMES, PIECES, OR BOARDS THEREFOR:
This subclass is indented under the class definition. Games or game structure wherein a competitive and amusing contest of skill or chance is engaged in by two or more participants using one or more surfaces having a pattern or confining region with which at least one contest element or the equivalent thereof is intended to cooperate, and where the results of the contest can be indicated according to definite rules (e.g., scoring).
Except that most people using iTunes aren't using P2P apps like eMule or Grokster.
A user still is paying the 99c/song to download the music. This app is simply allows the user to exercise his own ideas of what constitutes fair use in light of the current law, instead of being forced into Apple's definition of fair use.
I don't think this will affect the music industry or iTunes in the least.
-M
I've actually been working in the IP Law / tech. industry for quite a few years representing a couple different large technology companies.
I will throw you a bone and agree that Sony is difficult to negotiate with. They seem to need to get permission from too many units of their business before signing off on something.
However, I think you're WAY off on Sony actively asserting their US patent portfolio. I've gotten "offers to license" on a regular basis from other companies, but have yet to get one from Sony.
Neither have I heard any rumblings amongst my cohorts along those lines.
From what point of view are you speaking from?? (how do you work closely with these two companies?)
You are confusing the issue here. It has nothing to do with search results produced by the search engine. Rather, the decision affects ads presented to the user based on the word typed in. These are ads that the company behind the search engine has sold based on the keyword entered. (for example, if Google sells the keyword "playboy" to Penthouse, so that an advertisement to Penthouse shows up every time someone enters the keyword "playboy"). The decision does not affect and does not make illegal the hypothetical you stated above.
What are the chances of us Cingular customers getting reimursed for any of this down time ?? At 0.49 / minute, they owe me about $40 for the weekend...
Well, if you use the internet, then you seem to fall under the umbrella of U.S. jurisdiction. Im sure its illegal to post certain material that we would find to be ok in other countries, but thats alright. Try to do that the other way around and you'll get yer ass handed to you by the DMCA.
No, the only reason that Skylarov got his ass in jail is because he broke a US law (albeit a shitty one), then he came to America to give a speech. As soon as you step foot in America, you come under it's laws. It's very simple, if you break American laws, don't step foot in the country. Otherwise, do whatever your respective country allows.
That is an awesome idea! Let's see, we need to create a "fuck the RIAA" fund...
This is only happening because the politicians are getting a huge wad of cash from special interests, and chances are any of us techno-geeks have yet to contribute to a political campaign.
Money talks. I'm hoping with the passage of campaign finance reform, maybe we'll see that toned down a little bit. But in the meantime, looks like we'll have to fight this one out in the courts again. Click below to donate to the EFF, they need cash to represent us effectively!
http://www.eff.org/support/