I think to a certain degree software should be patentable. If you go out and develop new, innovative, and suddenly popular software - you should have a time when you don't have to worry about being deluged with copycats. That being said, a more intelligent idea might be to have time limits with variance per the item being copyrighted.
Basic mistake here.. a patent is not a copyright.. they are two separate things.
Software should be copyrightable.. not patentable.
With all the arguments using various forms of physics, people have forgotten one basic fact: The solar sail cannot work until some sort of particle screen is created to protect them. The sails would have to be so large that without a particle screen, micro-meteors and space dust would tear the sails to shreds before you could get out of Mars orbit.
Light Speed Limits... Not just a good idea.. its the law. B. Lightyear
Re:SCO still packs a punch?
on
SCO SCO SCO!
·
· Score: 1
Would the team at SCO really keep pushing a lie, even though they know that by doing so they will face unspeakable countersuits after the trial(s)? I think that SCO is cleverly hiding an ace-in-the-hole, and it's going to hurt Linux and IBM badly. This is unprecedented: no company would ever commit suicide so blatantly and openly.
Remember WWII and the concept of the "Big Lie"? What's the worst that can happen to SCO? They declare bankruptcy and the execs go on to destroy the next company. Typical Dot-Bomb thinking. This has nothing to do with IP and everything to do with driving up stock prices. SCO doesn't care who it ticks off because THEY HAVE NO PRODUCT TO SELL. They don't HAVE any consumers to piss off. So they have nothing to lose.
You are correct if the firewall/VPN is attached to a single machine. Since most firewalls/VPNs are connected to a network and they conceal the IP address of the recipient machine by the very nature of their existence (as far as the world is concerned, the connection ends at the firewall), then ipso facto, that network is now illegal.
One could argue that all you have to do is point to the local box that is the end recipient when the police show up, but if you use a dynamic network, the IPs change everytime a machine leaves/connects to a network. Once again, illegal by this wording.
In addition, if you choose to encrypt your email address or password so they cannot be sniffed, that will be illegal as well.
The language is so broad as to be ridiculous. The really sad thing is nowadays, tech laws only seem to attempt common sense in the courts, not when they are being crafted. So the tech industry has to dance the game until someone steps up to the plate to challenge the law in court. NOT the way it should be done.
Employing a facet of quantum mechanics that Albert Einstein called "spooky action at a distance," scientists have taken particles of light, destroyed them and then resurrected copies more than a mile away.
Previous experiments in so-called quantum teleportation moved particles of light about a yard. The findings could aid the sending of unbreakable coded messages, which is limited to a few tens of miles.
The new experiment used longer wavelengths of light than earlier ones, letting the scientists copy the light through standard glass fiber found in fiber optic cables.
So what they did is destroy light, use light to transfer the "destroyed" light a mile away and "ressurrect" that light? That doesn't sound like teleportation to me. Its like using a laser beam to send a laser beam.
The real battlefront is in Europe now, where a shortened copyright term of 50 years has held up since 1985. Is it in danger? This is tied with the bigger question of whether Europeans allow Bruxelles to become a business lobbying turf just like Washington.
Wait a second. I thought that the proported reason the extension was to bring the US inline with the European Copyright laws. At least that was the justification the Supreme Court used...
The exact thing has happened to India. Ayurvedic medicine consisting of herbs has been patented in US whereas these compositions have been known in India for centuries.
The US isn't the only one with this kind of idiocy. I remember hearing last year that someone in Japan was granted a patent on "curry". How the hell can you patent a spice that's been around for who knows how many thousands of years??
Before everyone gets into a huff about this, you have to realize that Apple had to do this to survive. What iCommune did was basically create a iTunes-based Napster. Since RIAA has been suing every version of p2p they can track down, Apple stood to get involved in a huge lawsuit as well as being forced to change the way iTunes (and probably the iPod) works.
Well.. I would agree with you but if you remember last year Sen Hollins put forth a bill that would make it legal for RIAA to do EXACTLY that. While I do think this has the flavor of a hoax (especially the crap at the bottom such as "Don't screw with RIAA", it doesn't mean that RIAA didn't go ahead with deployment plans with the assumption that this bill would pass.
I want my MP3s on my stereo - i walk downstairs with the very small, very light iPod and plug it in. If I had a car, I'd get one of those iTrip things. Wireless just seems wasted when you can just walk anywhere with it, you know? Again, unless I'm missing something...
The iPod has a max size of 20Gb (if you get the large one). Most HDs run 40Gb+. More music for the same price.. Or, if you have an external firewire drive.. 120GB+ of mp3s. Never have to transfer music again.
I bet this will be released with the iPod 2 which I seem to remember someone talking about here. Picture this scenario:
iPod with AirPort & Rendezvous
Mac with Airport & Rendezvous
iTunes on Mac with Rendezvous
Result?
You would be able to play your Mac-based playlists on your iPod from anywhere your Airport reached. Mix this with the TiVo announcement and change the iPod to a vPod (video-iPod) and you'll be able to watch your tv from anywhere Airport reaches on your iPod. THAT would be cool.
Another government agency that does nothing useful and employs someone's buddy. Why don't we just have the government open repair shops and cut out the middle man?
They don't even bother to do this. They set up a calling computer that plays a recorded message. No fuss.. no muss. Got one from Clinton last election. Nearly filled up my answering machine.
I'm on a do-not-call list in New York. Do you know what the exceptions are???
Political Calls
Non-profits
Anyone giving something away (like a sweepstakes)
Anyone wanting to make an appointment (to sell you something.)
Which basically means just about anyone. Even those that would have been covered by this can get around it by offering something free. I got a Telezapper instead.. works like a charm. Best $40 I ever spent.
If the Israelis split their country down the middle and created the Palestinian State, they would still find a reason for suicide bombers to go into Israel, even tho their proported purpose has been accomplished.
What a great way to rationalize continued oppression. You have no idea what would happen if Israel withdrew from the areas they occupy in violation of UN resolutions (what you call "splitting their country") because it has never happened. The fact that there were no bombings during a two year period when Clinton was negotiating toward this withdrawl speaks against your statement.
You misunderstand the comment. I wasn't justifing the Israelis actions. In my opinion, they brought most of this upon themselves, although the actions of the fundamentalists (on both sides!) hasn't helped the situtation. My point was that even if the right thing is done, there will still people who will hate and use whatever justification they can so they can to continue to hate... and derive 'power' from that hate. Look here in the US at the KKK and other white supremist groups. They hate not for any good reason except that skin color is different.
If a bunch of people are out to get the U.S., then why are they doing it? With all the anti-U.S. sentiment that I hear in some discussion groups, are we doing something wrong?
But what if we aren't? (We are going out of our way to piss people off btw, but the argument must go both ways.) Sometimes you just have to face up to the fact that some people need to hate. The Nazi's did it in WWII, the Taliban did it until we stepped in and most terrorist organizations are doing it as we speak. Yes, many of these organizations started with a principle and a goal, but too quickly those that thrived on hate rose in power and soon the message was tossed out the window and hate took over. Look at the Islamic Jihad in Palestine. If the Israelis split their country down the middle and created the Palestinian State, they would still find a reason for suicide bombers to go into Israel, even tho their proported purpose has been accomplished. The leaders thrive on the hate and see no reason to give up their personal power just because a little thing like peace tried to break out.
It's not that we shouldn't patch holes in our security, because we should. It just seems to me that nobody is addressing the policies of our country which have made us a target. Maybe we're doing something wrong, and maybe we're not, but nobody in the government is bothering to ask.
That's because the people in power here as well are thriving on conflict. Lets face it, if it wasn't for Sept 11 and the following "war on terrorism", GW's approval rating would be in the toilet. That's one of the reason's that the Iraq thing has 'suddenly' become so important. Those in power need something to distract us from the porblems at home. What politian said "Nothing like a nice little war to distract the people from the real problems"?
Slashdot Mirror
I claim prior art.
I think to a certain degree software should be patentable. If you go out and develop new, innovative, and suddenly popular software - you should have a time when you don't have to worry about being deluged with copycats. That being said, a more intelligent idea might be to have time limits with variance per the item being copyrighted.
Basic mistake here.. a patent is not a copyright.. they are two separate things.
Software should be copyrightable.. not patentable.
With all the arguments using various forms of physics, people have forgotten one basic fact: The solar sail cannot work until some sort of particle screen is created to protect them. The sails would have to be so large that without a particle screen, micro-meteors and space dust would tear the sails to shreds before you could get out of Mars orbit.
Light Speed Limits... Not just a good idea.. its the law. B. Lightyear
Would the team at SCO really keep pushing a lie, even though they know that by doing so they will face unspeakable countersuits after the trial(s)? I think that SCO is cleverly hiding an ace-in-the-hole, and it's going to hurt Linux and IBM badly. This is unprecedented: no company would ever commit suicide so blatantly and openly.
Remember WWII and the concept of the "Big Lie"? What's the worst that can happen to SCO? They declare bankruptcy and the execs go on to destroy the next company. Typical Dot-Bomb thinking. This has nothing to do with IP and everything to do with driving up stock prices. SCO doesn't care who it ticks off because THEY HAVE NO PRODUCT TO SELL. They don't HAVE any consumers to piss off. So they have nothing to lose.
Except, of course, this WAS the enterprise addition.
You are correct if the firewall/VPN is attached to a single machine. Since most firewalls/VPNs are connected to a network and they conceal the IP address of the recipient machine by the very nature of their existence (as far as the world is concerned, the connection ends at the firewall), then ipso facto, that network is now illegal.
One could argue that all you have to do is point to the local box that is the end recipient when the police show up, but if you use a dynamic network, the IPs change everytime a machine leaves/connects to a network. Once again, illegal by this wording.
In addition, if you choose to encrypt your email address or password so they cannot be sniffed, that will be illegal as well.
The language is so broad as to be ridiculous. The really sad thing is nowadays, tech laws only seem to attempt common sense in the courts, not when they are being crafted. So the tech industry has to dance the game until someone steps up to the plate to challenge the law in court. NOT the way it should be done.
Reading the patent, this has nothing to do with banner advertising. It has to do with web-based auctions. eBay, lookout!
Employing a facet of quantum mechanics that Albert Einstein called "spooky action at a distance," scientists have taken particles of light, destroyed them and then resurrected copies more than a mile away.
Previous experiments in so-called quantum teleportation moved particles of light about a yard. The findings could aid the sending of unbreakable coded messages, which is limited to a few tens of miles.
The new experiment used longer wavelengths of light than earlier ones, letting the scientists copy the light through standard glass fiber found in fiber optic cables.
So what they did is destroy light, use light to transfer the "destroyed" light a mile away and "ressurrect" that light? That doesn't sound like teleportation to me. Its like using a laser beam to send a laser beam.
The real battlefront is in Europe now, where a shortened copyright term of 50 years has held up since 1985. Is it in danger? This is tied with the bigger question of whether Europeans allow Bruxelles to become a business lobbying turf just like Washington.
Wait a second. I thought that the proported reason the extension was to bring the US inline with the European Copyright laws. At least that was the justification the Supreme Court used...
Already done here in NYC..
The exact thing has happened to India. Ayurvedic medicine consisting of herbs has been patented in US whereas these compositions have been known in India for centuries.
The US isn't the only one with this kind of idiocy. I remember hearing last year that someone in Japan was granted a patent on "curry". How the hell can you patent a spice that's been around for who knows how many thousands of years??
Before everyone gets into a huff about this, you have to realize that Apple had to do this to survive. What iCommune did was basically create a iTunes-based Napster. Since RIAA has been suing every version of p2p they can track down, Apple stood to get involved in a huge lawsuit as well as being forced to change the way iTunes (and probably the iPod) works.
Basic survival intincts. Blame RIAA, not Apple.
Well.. I would agree with you but if you remember last year Sen Hollins put forth a bill that would make it legal for RIAA to do EXACTLY that. While I do think this has the flavor of a hoax (especially the crap at the bottom such as "Don't screw with RIAA", it doesn't mean that RIAA didn't go ahead with deployment plans with the assumption that this bill would pass.
I want my MP3s on my stereo - i walk downstairs with the very small, very light iPod and plug it in. If I had a car, I'd get one of those iTrip things. Wireless just seems wasted when you can just walk anywhere with it, you know? Again, unless I'm missing something...
The iPod has a max size of 20Gb (if you get the large one). Most HDs run 40Gb+. More music for the same price.. Or, if you have an external firewire drive.. 120GB+ of mp3s. Never have to transfer music again.
- iPod with AirPort & Rendezvous
- Mac with Airport & Rendezvous
- iTunes on Mac with Rendezvous
Result?You would be able to play your Mac-based playlists on your iPod from anywhere your Airport reached. Mix this with the TiVo announcement and change the iPod to a vPod (video-iPod) and you'll be able to watch your tv from anywhere Airport reaches on your iPod. THAT would be cool.
Yeah.. I did read the article, but I was exaggerating a bit.
Exactly how is it an open standard if you have to pay licensing fees to use it, and assumedly write code to create it?
"Open standard" because anyone can license it to use in their software/platform.
MS is saying that you can use their standard in their software on their platform.
Big difference.
People are missing the point here... its only charging fees on NON-WINDOWS platforms. If you have a Windows box, of course its free.
Tell me how that's not anti-competive?
Another government agency that does nothing useful and employs someone's buddy. Why don't we just have the government open repair shops and cut out the middle man?
We started giving the phone to our 3 year old...
They don't even bother to do this. They set up a calling computer that plays a recorded message. No fuss.. no muss. Got one from Clinton last election. Nearly filled up my answering machine.
- Political Calls
- Non-profits
- Anyone giving something away (like a sweepstakes)
- Anyone wanting to make an appointment (to sell you something.)
Which basically means just about anyone. Even those that would have been covered by this can get around it by offering something free. I got a Telezapper instead.. works like a charm. Best $40 I ever spent.no way to import bookmarks - got a hundred in chimera, time to poke around and see if I can figure a way to do it
Drag and drop. Open Chimera's bookmark list and drag it to Safari's bookmark list. Done. Very sweet.
If the Israelis split their country down the middle and created the Palestinian State, they would still find a reason for suicide bombers to go into Israel, even tho their proported purpose has been accomplished.
What a great way to rationalize continued oppression. You have no idea what would happen if Israel withdrew from the areas they occupy in violation of UN resolutions (what you call "splitting their country") because it has never happened. The fact that there were no bombings during a two year period when Clinton was negotiating toward this withdrawl speaks against your statement.
You misunderstand the comment. I wasn't justifing the Israelis actions. In my opinion, they brought most of this upon themselves, although the actions of the fundamentalists (on both sides!) hasn't helped the situtation. My point was that even if the right thing is done, there will still people who will hate and use whatever justification they can so they can to continue to hate... and derive 'power' from that hate. Look here in the US at the KKK and other white supremist groups. They hate not for any good reason except that skin color is different.
If a bunch of people are out to get the U.S., then why are they doing it? With all the anti-U.S. sentiment that I hear in some discussion groups, are we doing something wrong?
But what if we aren't? (We are going out of our way to piss people off btw, but the argument must go both ways.) Sometimes you just have to face up to the fact that some people need to hate. The Nazi's did it in WWII, the Taliban did it until we stepped in and most terrorist organizations are doing it as we speak. Yes, many of these organizations started with a principle and a goal, but too quickly those that thrived on hate rose in power and soon the message was tossed out the window and hate took over. Look at the Islamic Jihad in Palestine. If the Israelis split their country down the middle and created the Palestinian State, they would still find a reason for suicide bombers to go into Israel, even tho their proported purpose has been accomplished. The leaders thrive on the hate and see no reason to give up their personal power just because a little thing like peace tried to break out.
It's not that we shouldn't patch holes in our security, because we should. It just seems to me that nobody is addressing the policies of our country which have made us a target. Maybe we're doing something wrong, and maybe we're not, but nobody in the government is bothering to ask.
That's because the people in power here as well are thriving on conflict. Lets face it, if it wasn't for Sept 11 and the following "war on terrorism", GW's approval rating would be in the toilet. That's one of the reason's that the Iraq thing has 'suddenly' become so important. Those in power need something to distract us from the porblems at home. What politian said "Nothing like a nice little war to distract the people from the real problems"?