Exactly. If litigated, this case would probably wind up with a summary judgment of non-infringement after the claim construction hearing (that's where the court ascribes meaning to each term in the claim and thereby figures out what the actual scope of the claim is). But just getting to that point is extremely expensive, far more expensive than any small-time software developer could deal with.
On the other hand, as long as these guys haven't been sued yet, they can file first for declaratory judgment, and thereby pick their venue. Since they're actually a UK-based company, though, I'm not sure this helps.
Well put. Also, a diagnosis may be necessary to convince insurance to pay for the cost of the doctor's visit, so a diagnosis makes for a happy customer.
They're not really that photogenic. To me, photogenic means there's a hot chick in her pajamas telling me to sign up for an online correspondence school.
This merely underscores the importance of completing development of a replacement platform for the Space Shuttle, to meet the clearly growing need for orbital clam chowder.
Class action suits means that a firm doing something wrong will get punished with a hefty fine, especially if punitive damages are added in, which discourages them from continuing their wrongdoing.
When does that ever happen? All I ever see coming out of class action lawsuits is that lawyers on both sides get millions of dollars, while customers get coupons good for meager discounts on future products sold by the defendants.
Probably part of this is Microsoft avoiding being sued for a declaratory judgment of non-infringement in a venue they don't like. I don't remember the case law reference, but there was a ruling a few years ago that essentially says that if you seek licensing fees for a patent or if you threaten litigation in assertion of a patent, then the potential licensee/infringer has a cause of action to sue for a declaratory judgment of non-infringement. In such a case, whichever party makes it to court first essentially gets to choose venue, and a lot of times, that ends up being the potential licensee/infringer, since the patentee would likely rather just get royalties with no lawsuit involved.
By making vague statements concerning infringement, Microsoft prevents their targets from filing for declaratory judgment over the unnamed patents until it's clear whether the targets are willing to license or not, at which point Microsoft would be ready to file its own lawsuit. It's not clear to me whether Microsoft is legally permitted to leverage an NDA to implicitly forbid the signatories of the NDA from filing a lawsuit (since the lawsuit would necessarily involve disclosure).
Deriving 3-d representations of the environment is mostly solved - what's needed is a way to recognize objects in the environment in an abstract fashion. There are techniques for recognizing, e.g., a specific box (one previously seen) in a complex scene, determining its 3-d position stereoscopically (no laser range finding needed), and interacting with the object robotically. What's needed is a way to classify unknown objects by abstract class, e.g., recognizing that there is a box in a scene, even though the specific box in the scene (say, something brightly decorated like a cereal box, or oddly shaped like some sort of product packaging) has never been seen before.
A new kind of organization. I would say Anonymous is a cyber intelligence organization, not just a collection of jerks.
There are a few people associating themselves with Anonymous who have the expertise to become a "cyber intelligence organization", and a few thousand who are jerks. The question is whether those few people have the resources to make it happen, and nobody can really be certain until they manage to pull off a coup of some sort (HBGary is chump change compared to what I'm talking about) without being busted by the FBI, Interpol, etc.
But in the long term Anonymous is growing stronger at an exponential rate. Their only flaw at this moment in time is their relative inexperience and their silly tactics at times. They go from brilliant tactics at some points in time (such as hacking the email server at HBGaryFederal), to really dumb tactics like DDOSing Sony and taking down webpages.
This actually proves my point. The masses didn't do the HBGary hack. That was one or a few people who actually know what they're doing. The only reason Anonymous gets the credit is because the people responsible allowed the credit to go that way. The Sony, Amazon, and MasterCard DDoS attacks were performed by the masses, and they've all created varying levels of embarrassment for Anonymous due to their lack of success or the pointlessness of their targets.
Why doesn't this debt collector just use normal debt collection tactics, and call Comcast several times a day every day with threats of legal action? It's a lot cheaper than actually filing a lawsuit.
Well, actually, you have to look at the claims. In this case, however, I'm a bit surprised that nobody could come up with invalidating art. See the Google Patents entry (since Patentstorm sucks ass) and scroll down to read the claims.
Actually, I tried to explain that that's not what I meant. Yes, big music relies on copyright, just like indie music does. But it isn't able to leverage copyright to crush indie music the way it can leverage big radio.
What really keeps people locked into Windows is that it comes pre-installed on virtually all the cheap machines out there.
Linux could theoretically compete, relying on Ubuntu's ease of use, except that Canonical seems hell-bent on breaking everything that they haven't broken yet about Ubuntu. Oh, and there aren't dozens of crapware makers willing to pay computer vendors to have their crippled trial crapware pre-installed on Linux boxes.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly. If litigated, this case would probably wind up with a summary judgment of non-infringement after the claim construction hearing (that's where the court ascribes meaning to each term in the claim and thereby figures out what the actual scope of the claim is). But just getting to that point is extremely expensive, far more expensive than any small-time software developer could deal with.
On the other hand, as long as these guys haven't been sued yet, they can file first for declaratory judgment, and thereby pick their venue. Since they're actually a UK-based company, though, I'm not sure this helps.
What's the patent number on that one?
But did the nuclear plant kill them, or did they die from the tsunami and ended up contaminated after the fact?
None of the things you listed can be put onto a poster and waved around during an angry protest.
But most of them sound great on the campaign trail.
Judging from the graphics on their website, the real problem is that somebody poured Coca-Cola in their servers.
Well put. Also, a diagnosis may be necessary to convince insurance to pay for the cost of the doctor's visit, so a diagnosis makes for a happy customer.
They're not really that photogenic. To me, photogenic means there's a hot chick in her pajamas telling me to sign up for an online correspondence school.
If they win against a patent troll, they gain nada.
It's actually even worse than that, because even if they win, they'll most likely still be on the hook for their own attorneys' fees.
This merely underscores the importance of completing development of a replacement platform for the Space Shuttle, to meet the clearly growing need for orbital clam chowder.
You can't get more impartial about a Java lawsuit than FORTRAN programmers...
That might just be the Alzheimer's at work, though.
Class action suits means that a firm doing something wrong will get punished with a hefty fine, especially if punitive damages are added in, which discourages them from continuing their wrongdoing.
When does that ever happen? All I ever see coming out of class action lawsuits is that lawyers on both sides get millions of dollars, while customers get coupons good for meager discounts on future products sold by the defendants.
Sadly, someone beat them to humancentipad.com.
Probably part of this is Microsoft avoiding being sued for a declaratory judgment of non-infringement in a venue they don't like. I don't remember the case law reference, but there was a ruling a few years ago that essentially says that if you seek licensing fees for a patent or if you threaten litigation in assertion of a patent, then the potential licensee/infringer has a cause of action to sue for a declaratory judgment of non-infringement. In such a case, whichever party makes it to court first essentially gets to choose venue, and a lot of times, that ends up being the potential licensee/infringer, since the patentee would likely rather just get royalties with no lawsuit involved.
By making vague statements concerning infringement, Microsoft prevents their targets from filing for declaratory judgment over the unnamed patents until it's clear whether the targets are willing to license or not, at which point Microsoft would be ready to file its own lawsuit. It's not clear to me whether Microsoft is legally permitted to leverage an NDA to implicitly forbid the signatories of the NDA from filing a lawsuit (since the lawsuit would necessarily involve disclosure).
vBulletin has had this option for years (not including the fake replies, of course), called "Tachy Goes to Coventry".
Deriving 3-d representations of the environment is mostly solved - what's needed is a way to recognize objects in the environment in an abstract fashion. There are techniques for recognizing, e.g., a specific box (one previously seen) in a complex scene, determining its 3-d position stereoscopically (no laser range finding needed), and interacting with the object robotically. What's needed is a way to classify unknown objects by abstract class, e.g., recognizing that there is a box in a scene, even though the specific box in the scene (say, something brightly decorated like a cereal box, or oddly shaped like some sort of product packaging) has never been seen before.
True prestige lies in having your work referenced by someone else.
Folkes, just because something from nature can be turned into a combustive substance does not mean it is renewable or green.
You apparently underestimate the number of Americans who routinely "knock out the fat" with their George Foreman grills.
A new kind of organization. I would say Anonymous is a cyber intelligence organization, not just a collection of jerks.
There are a few people associating themselves with Anonymous who have the expertise to become a "cyber intelligence organization", and a few thousand who are jerks. The question is whether those few people have the resources to make it happen, and nobody can really be certain until they manage to pull off a coup of some sort (HBGary is chump change compared to what I'm talking about) without being busted by the FBI, Interpol, etc.
But in the long term Anonymous is growing stronger at an exponential rate. Their only flaw at this moment in time is their relative inexperience and their silly tactics at times. They go from brilliant tactics at some points in time (such as hacking the email server at HBGaryFederal), to really dumb tactics like DDOSing Sony and taking down webpages.
This actually proves my point. The masses didn't do the HBGary hack. That was one or a few people who actually know what they're doing. The only reason Anonymous gets the credit is because the people responsible allowed the credit to go that way. The Sony, Amazon, and MasterCard DDoS attacks were performed by the masses, and they've all created varying levels of embarrassment for Anonymous due to their lack of success or the pointlessness of their targets.
Why doesn't this debt collector just use normal debt collection tactics, and call Comcast several times a day every day with threats of legal action? It's a lot cheaper than actually filing a lawsuit.
In the UK, they spell it "Cilences".
Well, actually, you have to look at the claims. In this case, however, I'm a bit surprised that nobody could come up with invalidating art. See the Google Patents entry (since Patentstorm sucks ass) and scroll down to read the claims.
http://www.google.com/patents?id=X4QXAAAAEBAJ
Specifically, the appeal will happen in the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, where all patent-related cases go after the district court.
I think you got Jesse Jackson, Sr., confused with the subject of TFA, Jesse Jackson, Jr.
Actually, I tried to explain that that's not what I meant. Yes, big music relies on copyright, just like indie music does. But it isn't able to leverage copyright to crush indie music the way it can leverage big radio.
What really keeps people locked into Windows is that it comes pre-installed on virtually all the cheap machines out there.
Linux could theoretically compete, relying on Ubuntu's ease of use, except that Canonical seems hell-bent on breaking everything that they haven't broken yet about Ubuntu. Oh, and there aren't dozens of crapware makers willing to pay computer vendors to have their crippled trial crapware pre-installed on Linux boxes.