WARF is a separate, independent 501(c)3 foundation which serves as the dedicated patenting and licensing organization for UW-Madison... faculty, staff and students are not obligated to assign their intellectual property to WARF, unless required to do so by federal law or the terms of a sponsored research agreement with a third party.
Patent trolls take questionable patents and go after companies without the resources to put up a good defense, hoping they'll decide it's cheaper to settle. They want to avoid litigation at all costs, because a loss threatens their business model.
A non-practicing entity _could_ be a patent troll, but not here. Apple has vast resources to defend itself, did so in court, and lost because the court determined that they were infringing a valid patent.
"look into the literally THOUSANDS of military jobs that are not in combat zones or areas of scarcity."
And why should one particular class of people be guaranteed a comfy stateside desk job with the same military pay and benefits as others who are not guaranteed similar comforts? As stated elsewhere, the military expects everyone to be able to serve in combat if required.
I've seen nothing to indicate this change applies to civilian contractors to the military.
"All type-C connectors implement the pins for the four pairs, but many cables only populate the wires for two pairs"
Nope. If a cable only implements 2 pairs, it's not a USB cable regardless of what the seller calls it. The spec requires cables to implement all 4 pairs.
More correctly: There are Type-C to other type cables which only have 2 pair, simply because it's not possible to have a 2nd pair on the other end (e.g. Type-C to USB 3.1 Standard-A). There's also an uncommon USB 2.0 Type C cable, which doesn't have any of the high speed pairs. But there is no C to C cable allowed which only has 2 high speed pairs.
Source: Universal Serial Bus
Type-C Cable and Connector Specification (the requirement has existed since the original 1.0 spec)
"How is that any different than the "money" in your bank account?"
I'm in the US, so the money in my bank account is directly denominated is USD, not that you show enough knowledge to understand even the distinction between M1 and M2.
"Veritaseum has confirmed today that a hacker stole $8.4 million"
Ethereum are not USD. Claiming that someone stole $ is intellectually bankrupt. They "stole" some bits arranged in a fashion that some people assign a value to. Try to convert those bits to USD, and watch the exchange price plummet.
One should realize that words with no pictures to aid understanding can confuse the attendees.
Yep, no ban. United's official Twitter first called it a "restriction on checking comic books...", then later clarified that "You can still place the books in your carry-on."
As mentioned somewhere below (citing Techcrunch) - this isn't a vendor/contract issue. The two equal owners of Snopes (via Bardav, Inc.) divorced, and one sold their share to the company running the web site. Now, the other owner apparently wants to move the website elsewhere.
It's a dispute between two equal parties in a company trying to take it in different directions. Since the party seeking donations isn't being upfront and honest about things, and actually seems to be deliberately deceptive, I tend to support the other side.
"Food food food!, Can I lick my balls now? Why can't I sniff human butts? Food food food! Can I lick my balls now? Why can't I sniff human butts? Do I smell a squirrel?"
You're referring to the ability to take an existing process, and add a simple "on a computer" to it to create a new patent.
That clearly doesn't apply here - unless you can point to some prior art which does motion capture/CGI without a computer.
Process patents are well established as legitimate.
You can certainly disagree with all intellectual property law - there are legitimate arguments on either side - but this is not a case of "on a computer."
"You can't have a contract with someone and hope to enforce that contract on the 3rd party. "
They don't need to. It's a case of infringement. If I have the patent to a process and equipment to implement that process, you might contract for a license limited to using that process and equipment to produce your own products.
If a third party borrows or steals that equipment from you and makes use of it without a license, they are infringing and any product they produce with it is tainted.
I've tried to search (go ahead and call me a Googletard, but I don't think that's it), but where did this whole "Xy McXface" meme begin? It predates the boaty thing, doesn't it?
Yeah, after looking at the pictures, those are more like small buses, which we often call shuttle buses.
But, trolley is often used to refer to something similar which is styled like a traditional overhead-wire electric trolley - often with open-air windows and used for sight-seeing or short loop shuttle service.
"humans still outperform any kind of self driving AI in an unknown crowded enviroment."
Somehow, I don't think that's the target market for 12 mph trolleys. I'm thinking more of airports or other locations where there's a fixed route, and possibly even dedicated lanes in places.
"It pisses me off that drivers think their gasoline taxes pay for the roads, when in fact gasoline taxes and other user fees pay less than half of the cost of the roads."
And, the rest is paid for by taxpayers, the vast majority of which are drivers, with only a small minority being regular cyclists (who pay no direct taxes to support road construction or maintenance).
Your point?
"Then they complain about bicycles rolling through stop signs while selectively ignoring drivers who don't come to a complete stop."
Never mind - your point was that two wrongs make a right.
"Don't bother buying a bike that costs less than $200. It will be extremely heavy, and the drive-train and brakes will be so awful that you'll end up going to a a bike store and buying an actual bike for at least $300."
It's always puzzled me why, when so many bikes are bought for fitness, their purchasers seek out light weight and efficiency, which only reduces the fitness benefit. If you want a fitness bike, a heavy frame, balloon tires, and dragging brakes should be a good thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope. Get your facts straight:
Patent trolls take questionable patents and go after companies without the resources to put up a good defense, hoping they'll decide it's cheaper to settle. They want to avoid litigation at all costs, because a loss threatens their business model.
A non-practicing entity _could_ be a patent troll, but not here. Apple has vast resources to defend itself, did so in court, and lost because the court determined that they were infringing a valid patent.
Your summary is much better.
There are only 2 C to C cables defined in USB. Both have the USB 2.0 data connections. So regardless of what Griffin call it, that's not a USB cable.
"look into the literally THOUSANDS of military jobs that are not in combat zones or areas of scarcity."
And why should one particular class of people be guaranteed a comfy stateside desk job with the same military pay and benefits as others who are not guaranteed similar comforts? As stated elsewhere, the military expects everyone to be able to serve in combat if required.
I've seen nothing to indicate this change applies to civilian contractors to the military.
"All type-C connectors implement the pins for the four pairs, but many cables only populate the wires for two pairs"
Nope. If a cable only implements 2 pairs, it's not a USB cable regardless of what the seller calls it. The spec requires cables to implement all 4 pairs.
More correctly: There are Type-C to other type cables which only have 2 pair, simply because it's not possible to have a 2nd pair on the other end (e.g. Type-C to USB 3.1 Standard-A). There's also an uncommon USB 2.0 Type C cable, which doesn't have any of the high speed pairs. But there is no C to C cable allowed which only has 2 high speed pairs.
Source: Universal Serial Bus Type-C Cable and Connector Specification (the requirement has existed since the original 1.0 spec)
Watch films from the 20's. No one could talk.
"How is that any different than the "money" in your bank account?"
I'm in the US, so the money in my bank account is directly denominated is USD, not that you show enough knowledge to understand even the distinction between M1 and M2.
"Veritaseum has confirmed today that a hacker stole $8.4 million"
Ethereum are not USD. Claiming that someone stole $ is intellectually bankrupt. They "stole" some bits arranged in a fashion that some people assign a value to. Try to convert those bits to USD, and watch the exchange price plummet.
If they had groupies, they wouldn't be spending time watching Netflix, they'd be "chilling."
One should realize that words with no pictures to aid understanding can confuse the attendees.
Yep, no ban. United's official Twitter first called it a "restriction on checking comic books...", then later clarified that "You can still place the books in your carry-on."
I feel like Paul Harvey...and now for the rest of the story...
Google "Elyssa Young snopes"
As mentioned somewhere below (citing Techcrunch) - this isn't a vendor/contract issue. The two equal owners of Snopes (via Bardav, Inc.) divorced, and one sold their share to the company running the web site. Now, the other owner apparently wants to move the website elsewhere.
It's a dispute between two equal parties in a company trying to take it in different directions. Since the party seeking donations isn't being upfront and honest about things, and actually seems to be deliberately deceptive, I tend to support the other side.
Khaaaaaaaan!
Why does everything always have to be about you?
For a translation, this is the one.
You're referring to the ability to take an existing process, and add a simple "on a computer" to it to create a new patent.
That clearly doesn't apply here - unless you can point to some prior art which does motion capture/CGI without a computer.
Process patents are well established as legitimate.
You can certainly disagree with all intellectual property law - there are legitimate arguments on either side - but this is not a case of "on a computer."
"You can't have a contract with someone and hope to enforce that contract on the 3rd party. "
They don't need to. It's a case of infringement. If I have the patent to a process and equipment to implement that process, you might contract for a license limited to using that process and equipment to produce your own products.
If a third party borrows or steals that equipment from you and makes use of it without a license, they are infringing and any product they produce with it is tainted.
This dupe is special, it's on the same page as the original! That takes a special kind of editor ignorance to do.
I've tried to search (go ahead and call me a Googletard, but I don't think that's it), but where did this whole "Xy McXface" meme begin? It predates the boaty thing, doesn't it?
Yeah, after looking at the pictures, those are more like small buses, which we often call shuttle buses.
But, trolley is often used to refer to something similar which is styled like a traditional overhead-wire electric trolley - often with open-air windows and used for sight-seeing or short loop shuttle service.
Like these: Image 1 Image 2
Note that a trolley differs from a streetcar - the latter runs on rails.
"humans still outperform any kind of self driving AI in an unknown crowded enviroment."
Somehow, I don't think that's the target market for 12 mph trolleys. I'm thinking more of airports or other locations where there's a fixed route, and possibly even dedicated lanes in places.
I'll bet you defended the elevator operators against automation, too.
"It pisses me off that drivers think their gasoline taxes pay for the roads, when in fact gasoline taxes and other user fees pay less than half of the cost of the roads."
And, the rest is paid for by taxpayers, the vast majority of which are drivers, with only a small minority being regular cyclists (who pay no direct taxes to support road construction or maintenance).
Your point?
"Then they complain about bicycles rolling through stop signs while selectively ignoring drivers who don't come to a complete stop."
Never mind - your point was that two wrongs make a right.
"Don't bother buying a bike that costs less than $200. It will be extremely heavy, and the drive-train and brakes will be so awful that you'll end up going to a a bike store and buying an actual bike for at least $300."
It's always puzzled me why, when so many bikes are bought for fitness, their purchasers seek out light weight and efficiency, which only reduces the fitness benefit. If you want a fitness bike, a heavy frame, balloon tires, and dragging brakes should be a good thing.