Just because you don't associate the trademark with the owner doesn't mean the trademark is invalid.
For example, when you think of Slashdot, you don't immediately think of BlockStackers Inc, the registered owner of the typed word "Slashdot", for use in news and public commentary. (Registered US trademark # 2359584)
I had no idea Dewey Decimal system was copyrighted
The lawsuit is about a trademark, not a copyright.
As an analogy, Twinkies and Ding-Dongs are trademarked names. If you started selling creme-filled yellow sponges and creme-filled chocolate cakes, you are within your rights. If you called them Twinkies and Ding-Dongs, you would be in violation of various trademark laws. The Hotel is using trademarked names without permission of the trademark owner. It is a simple case, and if it ever gets to court (which I doubt) the hotel would have a very tough time convincing the judge that they don't use the trademarks improperly.
The hotel uses something which very much resembles the original DDC classification, which is in public domain. As the site states
Good so far...
They use the basic classification which is probably the same as original one, created 130 years ago and is now in public domain. If they use it, they are completely within their rights to call it "Dewey Decimal System" because that's what it is.
Nope. The company OCLC owns a bunch of tradmarks on the Dewey Decimal Classification System as well as other names and phrases. Trademarks can be renewed as long as they are in use, and the DDCS has been in use and trademarked the entire time. As an exmple, you can start a company that makes creme-filled sponge cake and creme-filled chocolate cakes wrapped in tin foil. But you can't call those products "Twinkies" and "Ding-Dongs", since those are trademarked. If you started calling them Twinkies and Ding-Dongs, you would need permission from the trademark owner, or they could (rightly) sue.
In this case, the hotel is using a trademark of OCLC, and it is just as clear-cut as if you were to start selling Twinkies and Ding-Dongs.
I see that there are companies that are getting patents on DNA sequences. Next they will try to collect royalties from blue eyed people and suing those that won't pay.
This isn't a patant fight, but a trademark fight. They are claiming trademark violations.
I never knew so many/. posters were so ignorant of trademark, service marks, patants, and copyright distinctions. OCLC's law suit is the right action for them to take, if you understand the way the laws work.
Trademark & service marks = ownership of a particular mark for a particular usage in a particular domain which can be renewed as long as the mark is in use, to prevent a group's name from being tarnished by shoddy companies.
Patants = limited monopolies on the use of a method, to ensure that inventors have time to transform ideas into marketable (and profitable) products.
Copyrights = (supposedly) limited term restrictions on reproduction of any recorded information, to allow authors and artists to collect royalties.
They can claim trademark violations because the hotel is using the marks owned by OCLC without permission. It would be like some no-name snack company naming their products "Twinkies" and "Ding-Dongs". Now I'm off to paste this to all the others who don't bother to understand the law before spouting off about how bad it is.
I know you are trying to be funny, but you are very much wrong. They are claiming trademark violations.
I never knew so many/. posters were so ignorant of trademark, service marks, patants, and copyright distinctions. OCLC's law suit is the right action for them to take, if you understand the way the laws work.
Trademark & service marks = ownership of a particular mark for a particular usage in a particular domain which can be renewed as long as the mark is in use, to prevent a group's name from being tarnished by shoddy companies.
Patants = limited monopolies on the use of a method, to ensure that inventors have time to transform ideas into marketable (and profitable) products.
Copyrights = (supposedly) limited term restrictions on reproduction of any recorded information, to allow authors and artists to collect royalties.
They can claim trademark violations because the hotel is using the marks owned by OCLC without permission. It would be like some no-name snack company naming their products "Twinkies" and "Ding-Dongs". Now I'm off to paste this to all the others who don't bother to understand the law before spouting off about how bad it is.
Your post suggests that it is a copyright suit, but it is a trademark suit. Yes, the original numbering systems have passed into the public domain, but the tradmarks have not expired.
I never knew so many/. posters were so ignorant of trademark, service marks, patants, and copyright distinctions. OCLC's law suit is the right action for them to take, if you understand the way the laws work.
Trademark & service marks = ownership of a particular mark for a particular usage in a particular domain which can be renewed as long as the mark is in use, to prevent a group's name from being tarnished by shoddy companies.
Patants = limited monopolies on the use of a method, to ensure that inventors have time to transform ideas into marketable (and profitable) products.
Copyrights = (supposedly) limited term restrictions on reproduction of any recorded information, to allow authors and artists to collect royalties.
They can claim trademark violations because the hotel is using the marks owned by OCLC without permission. It would be like some no-name snack company naming their products "Twinkies" and "Ding-Dongs". Now I'm off to paste this to all the others who don't bother to understand the law before spouting off about how bad it is.
I never knew so many/. posters were so ignorant of trademark, service marks, patants, and copyright distinctions. You cannot copyright such a thing. At best, you could get a patant on a method of finding prime numbers. OCLC's law suit is the right action for them to take, if you understand the way the laws work.
Trademark & service marks = ownership of a particular mark for a particular usage in a particular domain which can be renewed as long as the mark is in use, to prevent a group's name from being tarnished by shoddy companies.
Patants = limited monopolies on the use of a method, to ensure that inventors have time to transform ideas into marketable (and profitable) products.
Copyrights = (supposedly) limited term restrictions on reproduction of any recorded information, to allow authors and artists to collect royalties.
They can claim trademark violations because the hotel is using the marks owned by OCLC without permission. It would be like some no-name snack company naming their products "Twinkies" and "Ding-Dongs". Now I'm off to paste this to all the others who don't bother to understand the law before spouting off about how bad it is.
I never would have imagined the Dewey Decimal System was patented and that libraries have pay money, each year, to use it in their library.
First, there is a big difference between patents and trademarks. They are (CORRECTLY) claiming trademark violation.
They own the trademark on Dewey Decimal System and other words. They manage the numbering system. The actual numbering system can be used by anybody, although businesses (not public libraries) may need to pay roalties based on their uses of the system.
I never knew so many/. posters were so ignorant of trademark, service marks, patants, and copyright distinctions.
Trademark & service marks = ownership of a particular mark for a particular usage in a particular domain which can be renewed as long as the mark is in use, to prevent a group's name from being tarnished by shoddy companies.
Patants = limited monopolies on the use of a method, to ensure that inventors have time to transform ideas into marketable (and profitable) products.
Copyrights = (supposedly) limited term restrictions on reproduction of any recorded information, to allow authors and artists to collect royalties.
They can claim trademark violations because they are using the marks owned by OCLC without permission. It would be like some no-name snack company naming their products "Twinkies" and "Ding-Dongs". Now I'm off to paste this to all the others who don't bother to understand the law before spouting off about how bad it is.
Does the DMCA say anything about about online books or other texts?
I posted a link to the actual DMCA. Go look it up for yourself, it isn't that big. Or, if you are more curious about existing copyright law and not that partitular act, go look it up in United States Code section 17. 17 USC isn't very long, and is pretty easy to read.
Has anyone been prosecuted for photocopying a book at the library under the DMCA yet?
What a scary question. I'm not entirely sure if you are serious...
Text of the DMCA)
The thing being complianed about and used in the lawsuits is the new chapter (Chapter 12, or Section 120x).
1201 (a) VIOLATIONS, doesn't really apply to books since they don't have a technilogical copyright protection measure... Unless you know of books that come out saying "VOID" when copied, or something similar, and are building or distributing copy machines designed to get around that.
1201 (b) ADDITIONAL VIOLATIONS doesn't apply to books or photocopiers.
1201 (c) RIGHTS NOT AFFECTED includes fair use, which this would fall under even if you DID have a protected book and a violating copy machine.
1202 covers copyright management information, which books and photocopiers do not have.
The remainder of that title has to do with punishments for violations
The remainder of the act concerns online violations (not applicable), computer maintenence and repair (not applicable), protections on sound recordings and motion pictures (not applicable), and protection of designs (not applicable).
So no, nobody would have been, nor should they ever be, prosecuted under the DMCA for photocopying a book at a library. They *could* be prosecuted under other laws for other copyright violations, such as if they mass-produced the book from their photocopy or otherwise used the copy in a way that wasn't subject to fair use.
What are the legalities of treating a salaried employee as an hourly wage earner?
Simple.
Traditional salaried positions are normally called "exempt". They cannot jump on you for being a few minutes late generally, unless it is being late for some specific business meeting (but that falls under not doing your job, rather than just being late). Benefits include being more flexible with your time and able to go home early if the job is done. Cons are that you don't get overtime unless your employer is nice and you work a bunch of extra hours, and you might have to work a few extra hours to get your job done without OT pay.
Everybody else is non-exempt or hourly. In this case, and as just about the only down side, is the boss can be as strict as they want since they pay for your time, sort of like "rent-a-body". Benefits are that if you have a time clock, you can bill them for overtime (1.5 * base pay) the moment you go over 40 hours, and depending on your local laws, double time (2.0 * base pay) the minute you exceed 50, 60, or 70 hours. In some cases, companies will allow you to voluntarily go over 80 hours at tripple time (3x base wage). Additional laws about paid breaks and number of hours/session and hours/week may apply (No more than 6 hours without a break and 12 hours per day, or 80/hour per week max. ).
I either heard or read somewhere (so take it as a grain of salt) about a cruise-line chef who was a US citizen for a US-based cruise line working hourly. (therefore subject to those laws) When most of the kitchen staff and serving staff became sick, he was asked to do almost all of the work. He ended up working over 18 hours per day, earning two months of pay while working on a 1-week cruise.
Another significant difference between salaried and hourly is ownership of ideas and stuff done outside of company hours. Salaried genearlly lets the company take any ideas you get, even if you have them at home while taking a shower. Hourly cannot do that, only the things you do while they rented you.
That's part of why you generally get paid more as salaried than as hourly, since they own more of your time.
Case in point -- my employer ( a small company of about 35 people) had a group who was about half salaried people and half hourly. Some of the salaried developers would show up as late as 11:00 without calling, but they routinely stay late. When one of the hourly people showed up at 9:30 (rather than 9:00) he was given a pretty bad, almost abusive, warning, and an e-mail went out through the group that all hourly employees were to be on the job BEFORE 9:00, and that the higher-ups would be checking their cubes to make sure they were there. There were a lot of complaints that the salaried people could show up whenever they wanted and stay late but hourly employees couldn't, and when the founder/CEO heard about it, there was some fighting in the ranks of the higher-ups (but no policy change).
Only 2 people of that team remain at the company, soon to be only one of them. (I'm still looking for a better job... Anyone hiring a graphics guru? )
I was dreading Fox News spewing their bile everywhere.
uh-oh, your age is showing. CNN and Fox News are fairly recent upstarts in the industry, and were able to grow because of the restrictions placed on the old companies like ABC and NBC.
We've got a similar issue outside our religious buildings in the heart of the city.
The beggers are not allowed on the grounds, and just inside the grounds are signs that say something like "Please donate to reputable charities or the hostel & soup kitchen just down the road." Even so, there are people who sit there, just outside the buildings, begging for money.
Once I saw a guy that's been there forever, who normally had a sign begging for $10 changed it to ask for $17. I had to stop and ask why he changed his sign, he said more people gave him money: they'd ask if he had change, he'd say no, and they'd give him a $20.
Sometimes when I see someone new on the street, I'll ask if they are serious about their 'will work for food' sign. If they say they are (It's only happened a few times) I'll bring them to my home, give them 3 hours of yard work, give them food, let them take a shower if they want, and give them some money.
Solve the 10% of cases that are genuine, slap major dis-incentives on the rest, and hopefully begging will evaporate.
What kind of dis-incentives? Put them in jail? They'll get 3 hots and a cot, plus games like GTA, and often develop gang ties. You can't fine them since they can claim to not have enough money. The only real dis-incentive would be to force them to actually take a job, but I don't know how you can force someone to be productive. Maybe there should only be four options to these people: (1) take a government-required job (hard labor if physically fit, manufacture or boring non-critical stuff if not fit), (2) get free training and housing through the job corps or military, (3) Plead your case as to why you need state help and cannot work on your own, or (4) get out of town.
The P2P architecture has been around for ages. The original concept of the WWW was based on a P2P model.
Exactly. When the last round of anti-P2P laws came in, I mentioned to my congress-critter that HTTP was based on P2P, and that a law against P2P, or adding barriers to entry for P2P, would only stifle new innovation. I included quotes from TBL about what his original purpose was: to share files.
Any time people mention that they don't like P2P networks, I ask them, "Oh, so you don't like your web surfing? You don't like your IM program? You don't like video chat? HTTP is a perfect example of P2P file sharing, they are trading web pages with you. IM programs developed from P2P chat programs, and video conferencing is P2P application."
Unfortunately we keep getting laws proposed that intend to stop P2P networks. Quite recently, there was (slashdotted about 2 months after being proposed, just a few weeks ago) attempting to block P2P because it encouraged kiddie porn, viruses, and privacy invasion. On that one I was able to contact my congress-critters and go through, point by point, about 6 pages worth of technical errors, quotes from famous tech people, and unintended consequences of the law. He changed his mind and said that he would vote against the bill, and would even read off most of my list on the House floor.:-)
You're kidding me right. On one side, we have geeks throwing money left and right on trying to get the fastest and newest computer hardware and software out there.... Maybe sometime far down in the future, when car companies can actually get "hybrid" and "power" in the same line, will it sell.
I know it is normally bad to feed a troll, but I can't resist in your case.
Go to your toyota dealership and invite three big fat friends. Stick them in the car and take a test drive. I've driven my Prius like that, and fully loaded with stuff. While you can feel the added weight, it isn't that bad. (yes, I know it was over the spec. weight, but the OEM tires are extra load and mine are inflated enough that it was fine.)
Remember that the Prius has a base weight of about 1.5 tons, so it isn't exactly a lightweight by itself. The engineers did a very good job of getting useful motion out of the horse power available.
I looked at the L series also. I'd like to take the plastic panels and put them on my doors -- it would have saved me a ding. While it is smaller than the L series, it is much bigger than the Escort.
Not much. One overpass I have to go through daily has had some pretty high water (probably 5 inches after a heavy rain). Other than getting muddy water splashed over the sides of the car, I hardly notice.
After I learned how to drive one, I refuse to drive anything automatic...
These cars intellegently switch between engines, each has a different torque and HP, and figure out the best distribution between the two. That is something you won't be able to do with a manual transmission.
Some posters have hinted that the Civic hybrid has manual transmission available, but it would only hinder the fuel effieincy of the thing. Personally I prefer the CVT (continusly variable transmission) in the cars, since acceleration is much smoother and the engines are quieter. If you want a noisy, jerky, manual vehicle, I suggest you go back a few decades and look at the classic Chevy cars.
I could not imagine the thrill someone would get from getting behind a Civic Hybrid pumping out a whopping 85hp. Sure I'd have a few extra dollars in my pocket, but I'd dread driving a car with that little oomph.
Go drive one. Also, drive the Prius. You will be plesantly surprised with what they can do.
Sure, it isn't a V8 dual-cam racer, but it isn't a geo metro either. Having driven a number of cars in my travels, I'd say my Prius has has a just about the same 'get up and go' as most smaller sedans I have driven.
What about the total lifetime of the car's parts? Specifically I'm concerned about the batteries.
The total lifetime of the batteries is estimated at over 10 years, which is longer than the estimated lifetime of most vehicles.
there is no battery recycling program and they end up being smashed apart with sledgehammers in a fourth-world country where the battery contents seep into the drinking water.
There isn't one yet, but I assume there will be one soon. They have the same type of batteries as are used in forklifts and your computer's UPS. Since they are lead, they will recycle quite easily. Maybe around 2015, the lead in your computer will have come from your car battery? [shrug]
I get between 37 and 40 miles to the gallon (depending on AC usage). The Prius under the same conditions may approach 44 to 46? And at almost twice the cost of the Echo.
I commute 56 miles each way, daily. [The job is worth it] About 55 miles of it is on the freeway.
If you will note on my web fuelings log I have a lifetime fuel efficinecy of 48.4 MPG. Yes, I use the AC (you can see in the images a tiny dip where I start using it for the summer).
With rough calculations, that's 80 gallons of gas you could have saved in one year, or over $160 at todays prices.
Finally, I would be shocked to hear that you spent only $11,000 on a new Echo.
Slashdot Mirror
For example, when you think of Slashdot, you don't immediately think of BlockStackers Inc, the registered owner of the typed word "Slashdot", for use in news and public commentary. (Registered US trademark # 2359584)
frob
As an analogy, Twinkies and Ding-Dongs are trademarked names. If you started selling creme-filled yellow sponges and creme-filled chocolate cakes, you are within your rights. If you called them Twinkies and Ding-Dongs, you would be in violation of various trademark laws. The Hotel is using trademarked names without permission of the trademark owner. It is a simple case, and if it ever gets to court (which I doubt) the hotel would have a very tough time convincing the judge that they don't use the trademarks improperly.
frob
In this case, the hotel is using a trademark of OCLC, and it is just as clear-cut as if you were to start selling Twinkies and Ding-Dongs.
frob
I never knew so many /. posters were so ignorant of trademark, service marks, patants, and copyright distinctions. OCLC's law suit is the right action for them to take, if you understand the way the laws work.
They can claim trademark violations because the hotel is using the marks owned by OCLC without permission. It would be like some no-name snack company naming their products "Twinkies" and "Ding-Dongs". Now I'm off to paste this to all the others who don't bother to understand the law before spouting off about how bad it is.
frob
I never knew so many /. posters were so ignorant of trademark, service marks, patants, and copyright distinctions. OCLC's law suit is the right action for them to take, if you understand the way the laws work.
They can claim trademark violations because the hotel is using the marks owned by OCLC without permission. It would be like some no-name snack company naming their products "Twinkies" and "Ding-Dongs". Now I'm off to paste this to all the others who don't bother to understand the law before spouting off about how bad it is.
frob
I never knew so many /. posters were so ignorant of trademark, service marks, patants, and copyright distinctions. OCLC's law suit is the right action for them to take, if you understand the way the laws work.
They can claim trademark violations because the hotel is using the marks owned by OCLC without permission. It would be like some no-name snack company naming their products "Twinkies" and "Ding-Dongs". Now I'm off to paste this to all the others who don't bother to understand the law before spouting off about how bad it is.
frob
I never knew so many /. posters were so ignorant of trademark, service marks, patants, and copyright distinctions. You cannot copyright such a thing. At best, you could get a patant on a method of finding prime numbers. OCLC's law suit is the right action for them to take, if you understand the way the laws work.
They can claim trademark violations because the hotel is using the marks owned by OCLC without permission. It would be like some no-name snack company naming their products "Twinkies" and "Ding-Dongs". Now I'm off to paste this to all the others who don't bother to understand the law before spouting off about how bad it is.
frob
They own the trademark on Dewey Decimal System and other words. They manage the numbering system. The actual numbering system can be used by anybody, although businesses (not public libraries) may need to pay roalties based on their uses of the system.
I never knew so many /. posters were so ignorant of trademark, service marks, patants, and copyright distinctions.
They can claim trademark violations because they are using the marks owned by OCLC without permission. It would be like some no-name snack company naming their products "Twinkies" and "Ding-Dongs". Now I'm off to paste this to all the others who don't bother to understand the law before spouting off about how bad it is.
frob
frob
The thing being complianed about and used in the lawsuits is the new chapter (Chapter 12, or Section 120x).
1201 (a) VIOLATIONS, doesn't really apply to books since they don't have a technilogical copyright protection measure... Unless you know of books that come out saying "VOID" when copied, or something similar, and are building or distributing copy machines designed to get around that.
1201 (b) ADDITIONAL VIOLATIONS doesn't apply to books or photocopiers.
1201 (c) RIGHTS NOT AFFECTED includes fair use, which this would fall under even if you DID have a protected book and a violating copy machine.
1202 covers copyright management information, which books and photocopiers do not have.
The remainder of that title has to do with punishments for violations
The remainder of the act concerns online violations (not applicable), computer maintenence and repair (not applicable), protections on sound recordings and motion pictures (not applicable), and protection of designs (not applicable).
So no, nobody would have been, nor should they ever be, prosecuted under the DMCA for photocopying a book at a library. They *could* be prosecuted under other laws for other copyright violations, such as if they mass-produced the book from their photocopy or otherwise used the copy in a way that wasn't subject to fair use.
frob
Traditional salaried positions are normally called "exempt". They cannot jump on you for being a few minutes late generally, unless it is being late for some specific business meeting (but that falls under not doing your job, rather than just being late). Benefits include being more flexible with your time and able to go home early if the job is done. Cons are that you don't get overtime unless your employer is nice and you work a bunch of extra hours, and you might have to work a few extra hours to get your job done without OT pay.
Everybody else is non-exempt or hourly. In this case, and as just about the only down side, is the boss can be as strict as they want since they pay for your time, sort of like "rent-a-body". Benefits are that if you have a time clock, you can bill them for overtime (1.5 * base pay) the moment you go over 40 hours, and depending on your local laws, double time (2.0 * base pay) the minute you exceed 50, 60, or 70 hours. In some cases, companies will allow you to voluntarily go over 80 hours at tripple time (3x base wage). Additional laws about paid breaks and number of hours/session and hours/week may apply (No more than 6 hours without a break and 12 hours per day, or 80/hour per week max. ).
I either heard or read somewhere (so take it as a grain of salt) about a cruise-line chef who was a US citizen for a US-based cruise line working hourly. (therefore subject to those laws) When most of the kitchen staff and serving staff became sick, he was asked to do almost all of the work. He ended up working over 18 hours per day, earning two months of pay while working on a 1-week cruise.
Another significant difference between salaried and hourly is ownership of ideas and stuff done outside of company hours. Salaried genearlly lets the company take any ideas you get, even if you have them at home while taking a shower. Hourly cannot do that, only the things you do while they rented you.
That's part of why you generally get paid more as salaried than as hourly, since they own more of your time.
Case in point -- my employer ( a small company of about 35 people) had a group who was about half salaried people and half hourly. Some of the salaried developers would show up as late as 11:00 without calling, but they routinely stay late. When one of the hourly people showed up at 9:30 (rather than 9:00) he was given a pretty bad, almost abusive, warning, and an e-mail went out through the group that all hourly employees were to be on the job BEFORE 9:00, and that the higher-ups would be checking their cubes to make sure they were there. There were a lot of complaints that the salaried people could show up whenever they wanted and stay late but hourly employees couldn't, and when the founder/CEO heard about it, there was some fighting in the ranks of the higher-ups (but no policy change).
Only 2 people of that team remain at the company, soon to be only one of them. (I'm still looking for a better job... Anyone hiring a graphics guru? )
frob
The beggers are not allowed on the grounds, and just inside the grounds are signs that say something like "Please donate to reputable charities or the hostel & soup kitchen just down the road." Even so, there are people who sit there, just outside the buildings, begging for money.
Once I saw a guy that's been there forever, who normally had a sign begging for $10 changed it to ask for $17. I had to stop and ask why he changed his sign, he said more people gave him money: they'd ask if he had change, he'd say no, and they'd give him a $20.
Sometimes when I see someone new on the street, I'll ask if they are serious about their 'will work for food' sign. If they say they are (It's only happened a few times) I'll bring them to my home, give them 3 hours of yard work, give them food, let them take a shower if they want, and give them some money.
What kind of dis-incentives? Put them in jail? They'll get 3 hots and a cot, plus games like GTA, and often develop gang ties. You can't fine them since they can claim to not have enough money. The only real dis-incentive would be to force them to actually take a job, but I don't know how you can force someone to be productive. Maybe there should only be four options to these people: (1) take a government-required job (hard labor if physically fit, manufacture or boring non-critical stuff if not fit), (2) get free training and housing through the job corps or military, (3) Plead your case as to why you need state help and cannot work on your own, or (4) get out of town.frob
Don't you hate it when you forget to preview, and find a bug in your HTML? ... Quite recently there was an article about HR 2885 ...
Any time people mention that they don't like P2P networks, I ask them, "Oh, so you don't like your web surfing? You don't like your IM program? You don't like video chat? HTTP is a perfect example of P2P file sharing, they are trading web pages with you. IM programs developed from P2P chat programs, and video conferencing is P2P application."
Unfortunately we keep getting laws proposed that intend to stop P2P networks. Quite recently, there was (slashdotted about 2 months after being proposed, just a few weeks ago) attempting to block P2P because it encouraged kiddie porn, viruses, and privacy invasion. On that one I was able to contact my congress-critters and go through, point by point, about 6 pages worth of technical errors, quotes from famous tech people, and unintended consequences of the law. He changed his mind and said that he would vote against the bill, and would even read off most of my list on the House floor. :-)
frob
Older models were lead/acid, new models are NiMH. Thanks for the correction. :-)
Go to your toyota dealership and invite three big fat friends. Stick them in the car and take a test drive. I've driven my Prius like that, and fully loaded with stuff. While you can feel the added weight, it isn't that bad. (yes, I know it was over the spec. weight, but the OEM tires are extra load and mine are inflated enough that it was fine.)
Remember that the Prius has a base weight of about 1.5 tons, so it isn't exactly a lightweight by itself. The engineers did a very good job of getting useful motion out of the horse power available.
frob
frob
frob
Some posters have hinted that the Civic hybrid has manual transmission available, but it would only hinder the fuel effieincy of the thing. Personally I prefer the CVT (continusly variable transmission) in the cars, since acceleration is much smoother and the engines are quieter. If you want a noisy, jerky, manual vehicle, I suggest you go back a few decades and look at the classic Chevy cars.
frob
Sure, it isn't a V8 dual-cam racer, but it isn't a geo metro either. Having driven a number of cars in my travels, I'd say my Prius has has a just about the same 'get up and go' as most smaller sedans I have driven.
frob
There isn't one yet, but I assume there will be one soon. They have the same type of batteries as are used in forklifts and your computer's UPS. Since they are lead, they will recycle quite easily. Maybe around 2015, the lead in your computer will have come from your car battery? [shrug]
frob
With rough calculations, that's 80 gallons of gas you could have saved in one year, or over $160 at todays prices.
Finally, I would be shocked to hear that you spent only $11,000 on a new Echo.
frob
These are solid state, lead batteries, basically identical to the UPS next to your computer (only bigger) and the big brick batteries in forklifts.
I'm impressed. :-)
frob