I doubt it. Windows Phone 7 has all the disadvantages of the first generation iPhone without any of the advantages. Maybe Windows Phone 9 will be OK, but by that time I think they will have missed the boat.
Bilski is different because it isn't a constitutional case. Congress has decided that mathematical algorithms and business method patents don't secure the progress of science and useful arts and have excluded them from patent protection. The issue is whether or not a computer program that works out the price of derivatives and buys / sells them in response to trades with customers comes under these categories.
In Europe, which has similar exclusions from patentability, a similar case was heard, and it was decided that if the same task could be performed by a "little man" in a control room, following instructions, then it can't get a patent.
Now this company could employ someone, or a whole team of people, pass them details of all the trades the company makes and give them instructions as to how to work out the price of the derivative and give them procedures to decide whether or not to buy or sell it. So if this case was being heard in Europe, the "little man" defence would apply.
Eldred v Ashcroft says it is up to congress to decide whether or not it secures the progress of science and useful arts, and courts can't argue with them.
Actually the ripping tools work fine on it, and it the only way I could watch my legal shop-bought copy of Avatar was to rip it to disk and watch it from there, so they've failed completely.
I don't think it is a case that they aren't able to copy it rather than that they don't want to copy it. They are doing a reasonably good job of copying OSX's funcionality in Windows 7, and that has always been the way they've done things.
And for those who don't get the joke, Philip Kaplan, the founder of this site, previously had a site called fuckedcompany.com which charted the demise of dot.com and other companies following the collapse of the internet bubble at the beginning of the century. A f*ckup of this proportion would have probably earned about 60 points out of a total of 100. You get 100 points for bankruptcy proceedings.
Nobody as far as I am aware is arguing that Congress were acting outside their powers in allowing patents to be granted. As far as I'm aware, Congress could pass a law allowing the software patents if they wanted to.
They are arguing about whether or not a computer program that calculates the price of energy derivatives and buys or sells them in response to energy trades is patentable under the existing rules made by Congress.
This invention appears to me to be part mathematical algorithm - calculating the price of the derivatives, and part business method - business operating procedure about how to run their business.
If you employed someone to do this manually, it wouldn't be patentable, and the position in Europe is that it would mean it isn't patentable to do it on a computer either. We call this the "little man" defence. I think we are hoping for a similar ruling from the US Supreme Court.
The main difference is that this isn't a constitutional case. The law says that there shouldn't be patents for software or business methods, and the courts have interpreted this in a very strange way. What we are asking the court to do is interpret the law as congress intended it to be interpreted, not over-rule it.
It is the same in Britain, but a lot of the chip & pin pads get replaced by fraudsters posing as bank technicians, and they have the ability to copy the details of the card, keylog the pins and send them via an internal gsm modem to the fraudster.
I think he means the type of piracy that takes place off the coast of Somalia. If you have to sail your American owned ship the other way round Africa to avoid them, that costs a lot of money.
There's no probably about it. How many terrorist incidents have you had in the last 10 years other than 9/11? I'm pretty sure I could count them on the fingers of one hand.
The Distance Selling Regulations let you do that, but not for Software.
The Sale of Goods Act lets you return anything that doesn't work or isn't as described. If you ask for Adobe CS4, and get a working copy of Adobe CS4, you don't have any grounds for complaint under the Sale of Goods Act.
Yes but software is exempt from the distance selling regulations, so you can't send it back if you don't like it in the same wat that you can send other things back. The reason it is exempt is as explained above.
Yes I think they can. They can't tell the difference between red and green light, but the specs they wear can, so they still get different images to each eye.
If you are British, show them your National Insurance number card, and if they don't accept that, someone needs to take a discriminiation case against them.
Slashdot Mirror
I doubt it. Windows Phone 7 has all the disadvantages of the first generation iPhone without any of the advantages. Maybe Windows Phone 9 will be OK, but by that time I think they will have missed the boat.
Bilski is different because it isn't a constitutional case. Congress has decided that mathematical algorithms and business method patents don't secure the progress of science and useful arts and have excluded them from patent protection. The issue is whether or not a computer program that works out the price of derivatives and buys / sells them in response to trades with customers comes under these categories.
In Europe, which has similar exclusions from patentability, a similar case was heard, and it was decided that if the same task could be performed by a "little man" in a control room, following instructions, then it can't get a patent.
Now this company could employ someone, or a whole team of people, pass them details of all the trades the company makes and give them instructions as to how to work out the price of the derivative and give them procedures to decide whether or not to buy or sell it. So if this case was being heard in Europe, the "little man" defence would apply.
Eldred v Ashcroft says it is up to congress to decide whether or not it secures the progress of science and useful arts, and courts can't argue with them.
Actually the ripping tools work fine on it, and it the only way I could watch my legal shop-bought copy of Avatar was to rip it to disk and watch it from there, so they've failed completely.
It is an interpreter platform, so it wouldn't be allowed any more than Java, Perl etc.
The don't need to resurrect it. It is already alive.
http://h10010.www1.hp.com/wwpc/us/en/sm/WF04a/215348-215348-64929-314903-3352590.html
HP already has a line of smartphones running Windows Mobile which they bought off Compaq. I have one in my pocket.
It is Hong Kong, which unlike mainland China, has a democratically elected government.
My 12 year old Alcatel brick had a contact book and an alarm clock. That's nothing new.
I don't think it is a case that they aren't able to copy it rather than that they don't want to copy it. They are doing a reasonably good job of copying OSX's funcionality in Windows 7, and that has always been the way they've done things.
And for those who don't get the joke, Philip Kaplan, the founder of this site, previously had a site called fuckedcompany.com which charted the demise of dot.com and other companies following the collapse of the internet bubble at the beginning of the century. A f*ckup of this proportion would have probably earned about 60 points out of a total of 100. You get 100 points for bankruptcy proceedings.
I use Linux whenever possible, which means that one computer in the office has it.
Nobody as far as I am aware is arguing that Congress were acting outside their powers in allowing patents to be granted. As far as I'm aware, Congress could pass a law allowing the software patents if they wanted to.
They are arguing about whether or not a computer program that calculates the price of energy derivatives and buys or sells them in response to energy trades is patentable under the existing rules made by Congress.
This invention appears to me to be part mathematical algorithm - calculating the price of the derivatives, and part business method - business operating procedure about how to run their business.
If you employed someone to do this manually, it wouldn't be patentable, and the position in Europe is that it would mean it isn't patentable to do it on a computer either. We call this the "little man" defence. I think we are hoping for a similar ruling from the US Supreme Court.
The main difference is that this isn't a constitutional case. The law says that there shouldn't be patents for software or business methods, and the courts have interpreted this in a very strange way. What we are asking the court to do is interpret the law as congress intended it to be interpreted, not over-rule it.
It is the same in Britain, but a lot of the chip & pin pads get replaced by fraudsters posing as bank technicians, and they have the ability to copy the details of the card, keylog the pins and send them via an internal gsm modem to the fraudster.
I think he means the type of piracy that takes place off the coast of Somalia. If you have to sail your American owned ship the other way round Africa to avoid them, that costs a lot of money.
There's no probably about it. How many terrorist incidents have you had in the last 10 years other than 9/11? I'm pretty sure I could count them on the fingers of one hand.
Not any more I wouldn't have thought. A lot of banks used to run it, but they have mostly switched to Windows NT now.
The Sale of Goods Act can be found here.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1979/cukpga_19790054_en_1
Where does it say you can return anything for any reason? I can't find it.
The Distance Selling Regulations can be found here.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/SI/si2000/20002334.htm
Sections 10 and 11 say you can return within 7 days. Section 13 says you can't return if it is software.
The Distance Selling Regulations let you do that, but not for Software.
The Sale of Goods Act lets you return anything that doesn't work or isn't as described. If you ask for Adobe CS4, and get a working copy of Adobe CS4, you don't have any grounds for complaint under the Sale of Goods Act.
True, but the Sale of Goods Act doesn't help you if you buy Adobe CS4 a week before CS5 comes out.
Yes but software is exempt from the distance selling regulations, so you can't send it back if you don't like it in the same wat that you can send other things back. The reason it is exempt is as explained above.
Software is exempt from that, otherwise everyone would buy the software, install it, and send it back for a refund.
Yes I think they can. They can't tell the difference between red and green light, but the specs they wear can, so they still get different images to each eye.
If you are British, show them your National Insurance number card, and if they don't accept that, someone needs to take a discriminiation case against them.