I'm all for companies patenting advertising methods, especially intrusive things like this - it means that no one else is likely to use them, sparing us from the ads. I doubt that will be the end result of this, but it's a nice thought that only a handful of companies would be able to annoy us with ads.
I'd wish them luck, but I'd rather they lose a lot of money trying to fight this instead. There's no lawyer alive that could give them the smiley face with so many examples of prior art. I'd rather see it be renamed the Faceball before the Wal-Mart Man...
Except that the solution to your dilemma is easy - contact all offenders, and charge the ones bundling spyware or adware a price that would make any profit impossible, and charge the ones that are clean one dollar for a ten year license, or whatever number you want to make up.
..this, but I might be the first to write it. Is it any wonder that the highest rates of piracy are in countries with a combination of low standard of living combined with poor law enforcement (in general, not just as it relates to software piracy - not eventhe US is great at that)?
The only reason they are stepping in is that they are offering a common carrier telephone service, and such services in the US are required to offer 911 service. The fact that it is over wire or IP is irrelevant, and it should be. Complain when they add other restrictions to an ISP that aren't phone service related...
The game doesn't try to be a sim in any way, and the graphics are horrid for the requirements. If you're looking for a space flight sim instead of Duck Dodgers Online, I would recommend Jumpgate instead, which can be found at http://www.jossh.com/
I don't think anyone has mentioned this, but... they could simply adopt the policy that is used here at the University of Nebraska. Residents in university housing aren't allowed to use routers of any kind. (Of course, this is on their network, and you can't get any other type of access from the rooms, although there are no wireless points in those buildings either. But when you have 100Mbit to multiple T-3s, there's not much of a reason.) I'm sure it could be worded to include wireless access points. Of course. if the problem is occuring in housing near the university but not under their jurisdiction (there are downtown apartments near the university that are close enough to potentially cause that here), the university would be pretty much helpless.
Personally, I still like a more secure and more identifiable wired network....
Everyone seems to be overlooking the reason Microsoft obtains these patents. Look up their history of patents. You will find a small number of legitimate innovations by Microsoft that they can make a good claim to. You will find a large number of patents that seem frivolous, have tons of prior art, and some are even so vague, they wouldn't stand as a patent if challenged, even without prior art. However, you'll find that they produce or are developing a product that uses the patented idea. The worst that can happen is the patent will have cases of prior art shown, and the idea will become public domain. What does it all mean? No company can sue Microsoft for violating a patent that only Microsoft has ever had (even if it's later ruled invalid due to prior art.) They aren't in the business of "sitting on" patents, they're just protecting themselves because they have the most to lose.
"And even then, the innocent defendent doesn't get their attorney fees paid for by the plaintiff. If even 1% of these thousands that were sued were innocent, that's too much!"
That depends on which state you're in. A lot of states not only automatically award legal costs to a winning defendant, but also damages for wasting their time, depending on the result and type of lawsuit.
I agree with your assertion that it would be fraud if they knowingly took money from him and would eventually charge him with cheating when they couldn't get any more from him. One thing I do notice people aren't suggesting - if he wins, he gets his money back, and not his degree. He still cheated, and should still be out on his ear.
The FCC can choose to license whatever broadcasts they want, I think. I suppose they may have an agreement with cell phone companies they've assigned the frequencies to that prevents it, but a small transmitter that blocks a specific area and doesn't interefere with ordinary transmissions might be allowable.
If some random person goes out and builds one, yes. This is talking about factory built models, accompanied with expensive and complicated-to-get licenses from the FCC that make them legal to use. As long as they are as regulated as radio stations (well, more so, with recent deregulation of radio), they will probably never pose a problem for anyone except idiots who wave at television cameras on their cell phones at sporting events, or foolishly take them into a movie theater.
Not if the devices are licensed by the FCC for those particular broadcasts. As illegal as a frequency jammer is, most places would get a license before trying it.
"Chandler v. Miller Struck down a Georgia law requiring candidates for political office to take a urine drug test on the grounds that it violated the candidates' Fourth Amendment right to privacy.
Grutter v. Bollinger/Gratz v. Bollinger Providing a strong endorsement of affirmative action in higher education, the Court held that public universities have a compelling interest in creating a diverse student body and that race may be treated as a "plus" factor in the admissions process."
I have no problem with either of those laws. Private universities can do whatever they want, but any school that takes public money should be required to follow the same discrimination rules as businesses - no discrimination based on gender, religion, ethnicity, etc, I don't want to quote that long a list. Will the ACLU really fight so hard for minority rights in areas where whites are the minority? I don't think so. I'm not saying they're being overtly racist, but they're focusing their efforts in the wrong areas.
That issue aside, I think ALL government employees on ALL levels SHOULD be subjected to mandatory drug testing... You can't name me one religion on this planet with a rule against peeing in a cup, and you'd be digging very deep to find one that doesn't allow someone to give a blood sample. People need to stop screaming that things violate their rights when someone comes up with a good idea that puts them at a disadvantage because they're doing something stupid, illegal, or both.
Just as you have been conditioned to think that people don't deserve free expression. Just because it wasn't written into the constitution doesn't make it a bad idea... (They didn't write anti-spam amendments, did they?:) )
Not that an anonymous poster will ever see that I replied, but they don't defend the second amendment because their interpretation (which is becoming more and more popular with historians) is the right for states to form militias for defense, not for individuals to own weapons. Most of the cases that the ACLU turns down involving the second amendment are persons or groups wanting to own automatic rifles or other excessively powerful weapons and claim to need them for "hunting" or something equally inane. I would agree that they have collector value, though, and if ammunition were not readily available, that logic might actually hold up in court. (How many people do you know have an unloaded bazooka in their living room? It would actually be a cool decoration... goes well with neon beer signs.:) )
Networks of people doing the equivalent of a Slashdot modding down to a person, keeping them from entering other people's buildings, or something like that. I read about it for a while, and though it might almost be fun to play Sims Online if I immediately joined a mafia, but then Project Gotham 2 came out, and a friend convinced me to buy Star Wars Galaxies, and, well...
Heh, if you move up to the better and more complex games, you could probably get away with a monthly fee for ADoM Deluxe. I'm surprised this wasn't done on more MUDs and MUSEs, actually...
That's easy, they get their money (starting now) from idiots who put out false reports against them and get sued.:) I'm sure they could find some good lawyers that'd work for a percentage on the contingency that they win. And Microsoft (or anyone else) couldn't just lend lawyers to the guy for defense - if you shoot someone on live national television, and are arrested in possesion with... wait, I think someone got off for that once. If you drop your pants on live national television during music video awards, no lawyer can get you off.:)
"Cable will realize that a move to pay-per-channel is the way to support content without advertising in our new time-shifted digital reality. Some people -will- pay $1/mo for TLC. Home Depot will still pay for product placements in Trading Spaces. Maybe the Super-station will go away - but the cable companies, and popular channels, need not."
While it's true a good number of people will pay a subscription fee to have a particular channel, there are too many different people and too many choices, with not enough expendable income to go around. Cable access fees barely cover the operating expenses of the cable companies. It's not very likely a different source of income will ever be found for television than advertising. Also, a lot is profit driven - a wrestling pay-per-view doesn't need to place ads, it will make a profit from its buyrate, but if they have a few sponsors, it means that much more to the shareholders.
First, let me say that I have no idea how this got modded up as Insightful (maybe Underrated, but...) and not down as Troll. You make good points, but you phrase them to look like attacks.
"To those complaining about having to use a credit card: How else are you going to pay for the songs you download? Food stamps?!"
The people complaining are the ones who don't want to have to give out credit card info in order to redeem something that is supposed to be free. I'd try and compare the logic to, say, the free month that comes with MMORPGs, but they use your credit card to bill you if you don't cancel after the free month, where iTunes just wouldn't let you download if you didn't have a payment method set and didn't have any free downloads left (assuming it were set up intelligently.) I myself wouldn't have any problem with it, I know I can just contest the charges if I was charged anything redeeming free downloads (not that I would use their service anyway.)
"Plus, the software is free, and is THE BEST jukebox software, on ANY platform."
I'm kind of curious, what does it do as a "jukebox" that WinAmp doesn't? (Or even WMP, other than WMP lacking basic playlist management functions that WinAmp has.)
I'm actually kind of surprised at my university's policies. The ports for WinMX are throttled, so my best source of anime and Japanese porn is gone, but every other filesharing method works fine, and they have never contacted me once about running an FTP server out of my dorm room.
Everywhere that cashes checks from banks to supermarkets that I have been to since 1998 or so have used a fingerprint identification system for anyone that doesn't have an account. In fact, when my bank first started using this (a not-for-profit credit union) they required all account holders who hadn't previously done so to print one check that they cashed. (They don't require it for anything after that, they just want to have one real print for verification.) Basically, if you don't want to give out your right index finger print everywhere you go to cash a check, you'd better ask your employer to pay you in cash...
Something just puts me off about buying anything other than toys, cards, and videos, with the word 'Dragonball' in its name. (Especially a processor... can it go Super Saiyan for temporarily increased processor speed at the cost of battery usage?) What marketing genius came up with the name anyway? I can hardly imagine someone in a board room suggesting this, and having even one person agree that it was a good name, let alone people who can actually make it happen.
In a related yet unrelated bit, there is a martial artist named Carlos Newton who calls his style Dragonball Z Jiu Jitsu. Do you think anyone took him seriously before he won his first UFC title? I suppose that could work in this PDA's favor, in terms of word of mouth advertising...
-computer store employee- Can I help you find anything?
-uninformed PDA buyer- My friend recommened I get the one with a Dragonball thing?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm all for companies patenting advertising methods, especially intrusive things like this - it means that no one else is likely to use them, sparing us from the ads. I doubt that will be the end result of this, but it's a nice thought that only a handful of companies would be able to annoy us with ads.
I'd wish them luck, but I'd rather they lose a lot of money trying to fight this instead. There's no lawyer alive that could give them the smiley face with so many examples of prior art. I'd rather see it be renamed the Faceball before the Wal-Mart Man...
Except that the solution to your dilemma is easy - contact all offenders, and charge the ones bundling spyware or adware a price that would make any profit impossible, and charge the ones that are clean one dollar for a ten year license, or whatever number you want to make up.
..this, but I might be the first to write it. Is it any wonder that the highest rates of piracy are in countries with a combination of low standard of living combined with poor law enforcement (in general, not just as it relates to software piracy - not eventhe US is great at that)?
The only reason they are stepping in is that they are offering a common carrier telephone service, and such services in the US are required to offer 911 service. The fact that it is over wire or IP is irrelevant, and it should be. Complain when they add other restrictions to an ISP that aren't phone service related...
I wonder if an RFID signal blocking wallet has been patented yet... anyone wanna lend me money to start my company? :)
The game doesn't try to be a sim in any way, and the graphics are horrid for the requirements. If you're looking for a space flight sim instead of Duck Dodgers Online, I would recommend Jumpgate instead, which can be found at http://www.jossh.com/
I don't think anyone has mentioned this, but... they could simply adopt the policy that is used here at the University of Nebraska. Residents in university housing aren't allowed to use routers of any kind. (Of course, this is on their network, and you can't get any other type of access from the rooms, although there are no wireless points in those buildings either. But when you have 100Mbit to multiple T-3s, there's not much of a reason.) I'm sure it could be worded to include wireless access points. Of course. if the problem is occuring in housing near the university but not under their jurisdiction (there are downtown apartments near the university that are close enough to potentially cause that here), the university would be pretty much helpless.
Personally, I still like a more secure and more identifiable wired network....
Everyone seems to be overlooking the reason Microsoft obtains these patents. Look up their history of patents. You will find a small number of legitimate innovations by Microsoft that they can make a good claim to. You will find a large number of patents that seem frivolous, have tons of prior art, and some are even so vague, they wouldn't stand as a patent if challenged, even without prior art. However, you'll find that they produce or are developing a product that uses the patented idea. The worst that can happen is the patent will have cases of prior art shown, and the idea will become public domain. What does it all mean? No company can sue Microsoft for violating a patent that only Microsoft has ever had (even if it's later ruled invalid due to prior art.) They aren't in the business of "sitting on" patents, they're just protecting themselves because they have the most to lose.
"And even then, the innocent defendent doesn't get their attorney fees paid for by the plaintiff. If even 1% of these thousands that were sued were innocent, that's too much!"
That depends on which state you're in. A lot of states not only automatically award legal costs to a winning defendant, but also damages for wasting their time, depending on the result and type of lawsuit.
I agree with your assertion that it would be fraud if they knowingly took money from him and would eventually charge him with cheating when they couldn't get any more from him. One thing I do notice people aren't suggesting - if he wins, he gets his money back, and not his degree. He still cheated, and should still be out on his ear.
The FCC can choose to license whatever broadcasts they want, I think. I suppose they may have an agreement with cell phone companies they've assigned the frequencies to that prevents it, but a small transmitter that blocks a specific area and doesn't interefere with ordinary transmissions might be allowable.
If some random person goes out and builds one, yes. This is talking about factory built models, accompanied with expensive and complicated-to-get licenses from the FCC that make them legal to use. As long as they are as regulated as radio stations (well, more so, with recent deregulation of radio), they will probably never pose a problem for anyone except idiots who wave at television cameras on their cell phones at sporting events, or foolishly take them into a movie theater.
Not if the devices are licensed by the FCC for those particular broadcasts. As illegal as a frequency jammer is, most places would get a license before trying it.
"Chandler v. Miller
Struck down a Georgia law requiring candidates for political office to take a urine drug test on the grounds that it violated the candidates' Fourth Amendment right to privacy.
Grutter v. Bollinger/Gratz v. Bollinger
Providing a strong endorsement of affirmative action in higher education, the Court held that public universities have a compelling interest in creating a diverse student body and that race may be treated as a "plus" factor in the admissions process."
I have no problem with either of those laws. Private universities can do whatever they want, but any school that takes public money should be required to follow the same discrimination rules as businesses - no discrimination based on gender, religion, ethnicity, etc, I don't want to quote that long a list. Will the ACLU really fight so hard for minority rights in areas where whites are the minority? I don't think so. I'm not saying they're being overtly racist, but they're focusing their efforts in the wrong areas.
That issue aside, I think ALL government employees on ALL levels SHOULD be subjected to mandatory drug testing... You can't name me one religion on this planet with a rule against peeing in a cup, and you'd be digging very deep to find one that doesn't allow someone to give a blood sample. People need to stop screaming that things violate their rights when someone comes up with a good idea that puts them at a disadvantage because they're doing something stupid, illegal, or both.
Just as you have been conditioned to think that people don't deserve free expression. Just because it wasn't written into the constitution doesn't make it a bad idea... (They didn't write anti-spam amendments, did they? :) )
Not that an anonymous poster will ever see that I replied, but they don't defend the second amendment because their interpretation (which is becoming more and more popular with historians) is the right for states to form militias for defense, not for individuals to own weapons. Most of the cases that the ACLU turns down involving the second amendment are persons or groups wanting to own automatic rifles or other excessively powerful weapons and claim to need them for "hunting" or something equally inane. I would agree that they have collector value, though, and if ammunition were not readily available, that logic might actually hold up in court. (How many people do you know have an unloaded bazooka in their living room? It would actually be a cool decoration... goes well with neon beer signs. :) )
Networks of people doing the equivalent of a Slashdot modding down to a person, keeping them from entering other people's buildings, or something like that. I read about it for a while, and though it might almost be fun to play Sims Online if I immediately joined a mafia, but then Project Gotham 2 came out, and a friend convinced me to buy Star Wars Galaxies, and, well...
Heh, if you move up to the better and more complex games, you could probably get away with a monthly fee for ADoM Deluxe. I'm surprised this wasn't done on more MUDs and MUSEs, actually...
That's easy, they get their money (starting now) from idiots who put out false reports against them and get sued. :) I'm sure they could find some good lawyers that'd work for a percentage on the contingency that they win. And Microsoft (or anyone else) couldn't just lend lawyers to the guy for defense - if you shoot someone on live national television, and are arrested in possesion with... wait, I think someone got off for that once. If you drop your pants on live national television during music video awards, no lawyer can get you off. :)
"Cable will realize that a move to pay-per-channel is the way to support content without advertising in our new time-shifted digital reality. Some people -will- pay $1/mo for TLC. Home Depot will still pay for product placements in Trading Spaces. Maybe the Super-station will go away - but the cable companies, and popular channels, need not."
While it's true a good number of people will pay a subscription fee to have a particular channel, there are too many different people and too many choices, with not enough expendable income to go around. Cable access fees barely cover the operating expenses of the cable companies. It's not very likely a different source of income will ever be found for television than advertising. Also, a lot is profit driven - a wrestling pay-per-view doesn't need to place ads, it will make a profit from its buyrate, but if they have a few sponsors, it means that much more to the shareholders.
First, let me say that I have no idea how this got modded up as Insightful (maybe Underrated, but...) and not down as Troll. You make good points, but you phrase them to look like attacks. "To those complaining about having to use a credit card: How else are you going to pay for the songs you download? Food stamps?!" The people complaining are the ones who don't want to have to give out credit card info in order to redeem something that is supposed to be free. I'd try and compare the logic to, say, the free month that comes with MMORPGs, but they use your credit card to bill you if you don't cancel after the free month, where iTunes just wouldn't let you download if you didn't have a payment method set and didn't have any free downloads left (assuming it were set up intelligently.) I myself wouldn't have any problem with it, I know I can just contest the charges if I was charged anything redeeming free downloads (not that I would use their service anyway.) "Plus, the software is free, and is THE BEST jukebox software, on ANY platform." I'm kind of curious, what does it do as a "jukebox" that WinAmp doesn't? (Or even WMP, other than WMP lacking basic playlist management functions that WinAmp has.)
I'm actually kind of surprised at my university's policies. The ports for WinMX are throttled, so my best source of anime and Japanese porn is gone, but every other filesharing method works fine, and they have never contacted me once about running an FTP server out of my dorm room.
Everywhere that cashes checks from banks to supermarkets that I have been to since 1998 or so have used a fingerprint identification system for anyone that doesn't have an account. In fact, when my bank first started using this (a not-for-profit credit union) they required all account holders who hadn't previously done so to print one check that they cashed. (They don't require it for anything after that, they just want to have one real print for verification.) Basically, if you don't want to give out your right index finger print everywhere you go to cash a check, you'd better ask your employer to pay you in cash...
Something just puts me off about buying anything other than toys, cards, and videos, with the word 'Dragonball' in its name. (Especially a processor... can it go Super Saiyan for temporarily increased processor speed at the cost of battery usage?) What marketing genius came up with the name anyway? I can hardly imagine someone in a board room suggesting this, and having even one person agree that it was a good name, let alone people who can actually make it happen.
In a related yet unrelated bit, there is a martial artist named Carlos Newton who calls his style Dragonball Z Jiu Jitsu. Do you think anyone took him seriously before he won his first UFC title? I suppose that could work in this PDA's favor, in terms of word of mouth advertising...
-computer store employee- Can I help you find anything?
-uninformed PDA buyer- My friend recommened I get the one with a Dragonball thing?
-computer store employee- Right this way...