Keep in mind that enablement is a requirement based on the entire disclosure. The claims indicate what needs to be enabled by the disclosure. Also, enablement doesn't mean that every last detail has to be disclosed - anything already in the prior art, for instance, is assumed to be within the grasp of one having ordinary skill in the art, and so they don't have to regurgitate some face recognition technique that's well known in the art.
Absolutely and completely incorrect. During examination, claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification as one having ordinary skill in the art would understand them, without unduly importing details from the specification into the claims. The claims can encompass variations not disclosed in the spec, and the claims can be rejected with prior art that doesn't match what's disclosed in the spec.
In fact, the courts take an even narrower view of the claims than the PTO does, because the courts construe each claim term specifically according to the spec, as part of what's called a Markman hearing.
As Judge Rich of the CAFC once said, the name of the game is the claim.
Not the spec, not the drawings, not the abstract or title. The claims.
and the spokemodel (oh sorry, anchor woman) talked like patents were God's gift to the earth.
That's because patents are viewed as being a representation of ingenuity, or as an endorsement of an invention by the government. They're not. You can invent the most bass-ackward mechanism that totally sucks, and as long as it hasn't been done before and it's not obvious (which, since it sucks, it quite possibly won't be), you can get a patent.
But laypersons tend to view "Patent Pending" as meaning something special, rather than just an indication that someone has a right to exclude others from practicing the invention.
And it has enjoyed a great deal of success - in part due to the lack of central control.
But Anonymous hasn't really done anything that requires the true contributive efforts of more than a few people at a time. LOIC doesn't count, because "here, run this" isn't in the same ballpark as actually contributing code to a project. The person/people who wrote LOIC still exercised control over the actual software and made decisions about what features went in and what didn't.
Ex post facto, under the US Constitution, only refers to criminal law, and then only to cases where a change in criminal law would impose a harsher punishment on those who committed a crime before the change (i.e., reducing sentences retroactively is okay).
A stronger argument would be that retroactive re-copyrighting is an illegal "taking" from the public under the Fifth Amendment without providing the public with appropriate compensation. I don't think this argument was pursued in Eldred v. Ashcroft.
The US doesn't recognize it as a matter of international law.
That means that the US believes that matters of political asylum are strictly between the state granting asylum and the state from which the asylum-seeker is being withheld, and international bodies such as the OAS, the UN, etc., and their member states, would/should not get involved.
In other words, if Ecuador wants to find a way to get Assange out of the UK, they can't rely on the OAS to enforce safe passage - they'll have to actually negotiate that with the Brits.
That's essentially what cancer is, a genetic mutation in a cell that evolves it into an undying, eternally reproducing organism that parasitically gets its nutrients from its host organism/ancestor.
TFS obviously tries to throw the results of this study back in the Koch Foundation's face, by singling them out when the study was funded by numerous other groups. It's just another insufferable "I told you so", which we can all relate to as making people cling ever more tightly to their beliefs or just refuse to change their ways for spite.
So wouldn't it make more sense first to sit back and see if the Koch brothers become converted skeptics like Muller? Imagine having their billions behind efforts to advance alternative energy.
Well spoken. Plus, none of these armchair examiners will put their keyboards where their mouths are and actually apply for a job (we're hiring).
Here's what the patent is actually about:
A method, comprising: at a portable multifunction device with a touch screen display:
displaying a portion of an electronic document on the touch screen display, wherein the displayed portion of the electronic document has a vertical position in the electronic document;
displaying a vertical bar on top of the displayed portion of the electronic document, the vertical bar displayed proximate to a vertical edge of the displayed portion of the electronic document, wherein:
the vertical bar has a vertical position on top of the displayed portion of the electronic document that corresponds to the vertical position in the electronic document of the displayed portion of the electronic document; and
the vertical bar is not a scroll bar;
detecting a movement of an object in a direction on the displayed portion of the electronic document;
in response to detecting the movement:
scrolling the electronic document displayed on the touch screen display in the direction of movement of the object so that a new portion of the electronic document is displayed,
moving the vertical bar to a new vertical position such that the new vertical position corresponds to the vertical position in the electronic document of the displayed new portion of the electronic document, and
maintaining the vertical bar proximate to the vertical edge of the displayed portion of the electronic document; and
in response to a predetermined condition being met,
ceasing to display the vertical bar while continuing to display the displayed portion of the electronic document, wherein the displayed portion of the electronic document has a vertical extent that is less than a vertical extent of the electronic document.
To bring it back for the nerds, it's the difference between Patrick Stewart in Season 1 of TNG versus Season 7. He really hammed it up in Season 1 because he was performing like a stage actor (something he also did in movies like Dune, Lifeforce, Excalibur, etc.) and apparently hadn't really mastered the much subtler art of performing for TV.
Seriously, why would the police care if the police are doing nothing wrong?
If only it really worked that way. Edits made to a video can make it seem like the cops are out-of-line when they were actually acting in accordance with the law, and even an unedited video can sometimes be spun by those with an anti-police agenda.
That said, the police in this case are at least responding properly to the videojournalists' actions, by letting each other know that they need to be especially on their guard to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, and by allowing the videotaping to continue. The only thing that makes this case particularly special is that there aren't more people out there videotaping the cops. If lots of people did it, then it wouldn't be anything special, and the cops would ultimately make fundamental changes in their own policies and behavior.
No, he's right. On systems where your constants exist in a different medium than your variables (such as microcontrollers where variables are in RAM but constants are in flash), declaring a string as const or not const can have a big impact on what resources you eat up. Typcially, there's often a #pragma or non-standard keyword such as ROM that goes along with this.
And this is particularly relevant in this case, because Slashdot runs on CowboyNeal's microwave oven.
Some channels actually have "descriptive audio" here. It's actually exactly what it sounds like. A voice describes what is happening, overlaid onto the audio. Once in a while I'll turn it on and try watching something with my eyes closed.. surprisingly for stuff that's heavily dialog driven, it works surprisingly well.
The way the story is normally told the scorpion specifically points out that the frog can trust it because stinging the frog would kill them both. The way you tell it, having the frog seemingly rely on the scorpion's promise instead of the scorpion's self interest, makes the frog seem dumb at the beginning.
But then it would be a poor analogy for the situation with MS and their partners, because MS is doing what's probably in its own self-interest here.
Having seen numerous apps drafted and filed by various entities - including pro se applicants, US-based patent attorneys, and foreign-based patent attorneys (through a US-based attorney who acts as a glorified courier) - I can tell you that hiring a registered US-based patent attorney is a smart move unless you already have significant experience with patent prosecution. Most of the pro se applicants who look like they know what they're doing actually have an attorney on the payroll for drafting purposes, but choose to file everything themselves.
Aside from the database of issued patents and patent application publications, the USPTO also has access to searchable abstracts for Japanese and European patents. We also have a database of previously internal publications that IBM published mostly back in the 1970s and 1980s. Plus, we subscribe to a variety of tech journals, most importantly everything IEEE has to offer.
The best way to help is to come up with better ways to index and search these documents. The search engine for patents and pubs is actually pretty good, allowing several different proximity operators. On the other hand, the best search engine for non-patent literature is Google Scholar, which does a good job of automatically handling word variants and synonyms, but is much less flexible when it comes to word proximity.
Another issue ends up being, when a feature in a claim is so painfully commonplace that nobody ever actually writes down that they do things that way (except in source code, which we don't have time to sift through most of the time), where do we go to find legal evidence (and not just us BSing about it) that a certain technique really is how things are done?
Slashdot Mirror
In my brief experience in court, one lesson that my lawyer taught me was to honestly answer questions, but don't offer info not asked for.
Which, ironically, was something that Hogan probably learned from his attorney in his first two court cases that he failed to mention.
anounced Ahmadinejad's "victory" 3 hours before the polls were over...
So it is similar to our fox news?
Under the current administration, it's more like MSNBC.
problem is someone was bound to think of that eventually
Someone is bound to think of everything eventually. That's not a reason to deny someone a patent.
Keep in mind that enablement is a requirement based on the entire disclosure. The claims indicate what needs to be enabled by the disclosure. Also, enablement doesn't mean that every last detail has to be disclosed - anything already in the prior art, for instance, is assumed to be within the grasp of one having ordinary skill in the art, and so they don't have to regurgitate some face recognition technique that's well known in the art.
Absolutely and completely incorrect. During examination, claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification as one having ordinary skill in the art would understand them, without unduly importing details from the specification into the claims. The claims can encompass variations not disclosed in the spec, and the claims can be rejected with prior art that doesn't match what's disclosed in the spec.
In fact, the courts take an even narrower view of the claims than the PTO does, because the courts construe each claim term specifically according to the spec, as part of what's called a Markman hearing.
As Judge Rich of the CAFC once said, the name of the game is the claim.
Not the spec, not the drawings, not the abstract or title. The claims.
and the spokemodel (oh sorry, anchor woman) talked like patents were God's gift to the earth.
That's because patents are viewed as being a representation of ingenuity, or as an endorsement of an invention by the government. They're not. You can invent the most bass-ackward mechanism that totally sucks, and as long as it hasn't been done before and it's not obvious (which, since it sucks, it quite possibly won't be), you can get a patent.
But laypersons tend to view "Patent Pending" as meaning something special, rather than just an indication that someone has a right to exclude others from practicing the invention.
And it has enjoyed a great deal of success - in part due to the lack of central control.
But Anonymous hasn't really done anything that requires the true contributive efforts of more than a few people at a time. LOIC doesn't count, because "here, run this" isn't in the same ballpark as actually contributing code to a project. The person/people who wrote LOIC still exercised control over the actual software and made decisions about what features went in and what didn't.
Ex post facto, under the US Constitution, only refers to criminal law, and then only to cases where a change in criminal law would impose a harsher punishment on those who committed a crime before the change (i.e., reducing sentences retroactively is okay).
A stronger argument would be that retroactive re-copyrighting is an illegal "taking" from the public under the Fifth Amendment without providing the public with appropriate compensation. I don't think this argument was pursued in Eldred v. Ashcroft.
One last niche market for Nokia to fill. And it's local, too!
The US doesn't recognize it as a matter of international law.
That means that the US believes that matters of political asylum are strictly between the state granting asylum and the state from which the asylum-seeker is being withheld, and international bodies such as the OAS, the UN, etc., and their member states, would/should not get involved.
In other words, if Ecuador wants to find a way to get Assange out of the UK, they can't rely on the OAS to enforce safe passage - they'll have to actually negotiate that with the Brits.
That's essentially what cancer is, a genetic mutation in a cell that evolves it into an undying, eternally reproducing organism that parasitically gets its nutrients from its host organism/ancestor.
On Slashdot, I often post anecdotes from current and past jobs, and I wouldn't do so if my name was attached to the post.
Yeah, me too buddy.
TFS obviously tries to throw the results of this study back in the Koch Foundation's face, by singling them out when the study was funded by numerous other groups. It's just another insufferable "I told you so", which we can all relate to as making people cling ever more tightly to their beliefs or just refuse to change their ways for spite.
So wouldn't it make more sense first to sit back and see if the Koch brothers become converted skeptics like Muller? Imagine having their billions behind efforts to advance alternative energy.
Well spoken. Plus, none of these armchair examiners will put their keyboards where their mouths are and actually apply for a job (we're hiring).
Here's what the patent is actually about:
TLDR: bigger...not overacting
To bring it back for the nerds, it's the difference between Patrick Stewart in Season 1 of TNG versus Season 7. He really hammed it up in Season 1 because he was performing like a stage actor (something he also did in movies like Dune, Lifeforce, Excalibur, etc.) and apparently hadn't really mastered the much subtler art of performing for TV.
I just have one question:
Did he get rid of the corpses?
By her measure we should all be running away screaming instead of reading useless comments like this one.
I tried screaming, but the lameness filter wouldn't let me.
Seriously, why would the police care if the police are doing nothing wrong?
If only it really worked that way. Edits made to a video can make it seem like the cops are out-of-line when they were actually acting in accordance with the law, and even an unedited video can sometimes be spun by those with an anti-police agenda.
That said, the police in this case are at least responding properly to the videojournalists' actions, by letting each other know that they need to be especially on their guard to avoid even the appearance of impropriety, and by allowing the videotaping to continue. The only thing that makes this case particularly special is that there aren't more people out there videotaping the cops. If lots of people did it, then it wouldn't be anything special, and the cops would ultimately make fundamental changes in their own policies and behavior.
I need a Greasemonkey script that changes it to a "covet" button.
No, he's right. On systems where your constants exist in a different medium than your variables (such as microcontrollers where variables are in RAM but constants are in flash), declaring a string as const or not const can have a big impact on what resources you eat up. Typcially, there's often a #pragma or non-standard keyword such as ROM that goes along with this.
And this is particularly relevant in this case, because Slashdot runs on CowboyNeal's microwave oven.
Some channels actually have "descriptive audio" here. It's actually exactly what it sounds like. A voice describes what is happening, overlaid onto the audio. Once in a while I'll turn it on and try watching something with my eyes closed.. surprisingly for stuff that's heavily dialog driven, it works surprisingly well.
Once upon a time, those were called radio shows.
The way the story is normally told the scorpion specifically points out that the frog can trust it because stinging the frog would kill them both. The way you tell it, having the frog seemingly rely on the scorpion's promise instead of the scorpion's self interest, makes the frog seem dumb at the beginning.
But then it would be a poor analogy for the situation with MS and their partners, because MS is doing what's probably in its own self-interest here.
Having seen numerous apps drafted and filed by various entities - including pro se applicants, US-based patent attorneys, and foreign-based patent attorneys (through a US-based attorney who acts as a glorified courier) - I can tell you that hiring a registered US-based patent attorney is a smart move unless you already have significant experience with patent prosecution. Most of the pro se applicants who look like they know what they're doing actually have an attorney on the payroll for drafting purposes, but choose to file everything themselves.
Lebanon.
Aside from the database of issued patents and patent application publications, the USPTO also has access to searchable abstracts for Japanese and European patents. We also have a database of previously internal publications that IBM published mostly back in the 1970s and 1980s. Plus, we subscribe to a variety of tech journals, most importantly everything IEEE has to offer.
The best way to help is to come up with better ways to index and search these documents. The search engine for patents and pubs is actually pretty good, allowing several different proximity operators. On the other hand, the best search engine for non-patent literature is Google Scholar, which does a good job of automatically handling word variants and synonyms, but is much less flexible when it comes to word proximity.
Another issue ends up being, when a feature in a claim is so painfully commonplace that nobody ever actually writes down that they do things that way (except in source code, which we don't have time to sift through most of the time), where do we go to find legal evidence (and not just us BSing about it) that a certain technique really is how things are done?