Unfortunately, when you install Girlfriend 1.0, there's always conflicts. Also, Wife 1.0 is always trying to download a beta version of iBaby, and the nag screens saying "Do you want to install iBaby?" keep popping up.
I don't think most hybrid cars have a third electric motor coupled to an engine for generating electric power and also coupled to the wheels for driving the car also.
1. A hybrid vehicle, comprising: at least two pairs of wheels, each pair of wheels operable to receive power to propel said hybrid vehicle; a first alternating current (AC) electric motor, operable to provide power to a first pair of said at least two pairs of wheels to propel said hybrid vehicle; a second alternating current (AC) electric motor, operable to provide power to a second pair of said at least two pairs of wheels to propel said hybrid vehicle a third AC electric motor; an engine coupled to said third electric motor, operable to provide power to at least one of said two pairs of wheels to propel the hybrid vehicle, and/or to said third electric motor to drive the third electric motor to generate electric power; a first alternating current-direct current (AC-DC) converter having an AC side coupled to said first electric motor, operable to accept AC or DC current and convert the current to DC or AC current respectively; a second alternating current-direct current (AC-DC) converter having an AC side coupled to said second electric motor, operable to accept AC or DC current and convert the current to DC or AC current respectively; a third alternating current-direct current (AC-DC) converter coupled to said third electric motor, at least operable to accept AC current and convert the current to DC; an electrical storage device coupled to a DC side of said AC-DC converters, wherein the electrical storage device is operable to store DC energy received from said AC-DC converters and provide DC energy to at least said first and second AC-DC converters for providing power to at least said first and second electric motors; and a controller, operable to start and stop the engine to minimize fuel consumption.
essentially, they patented a triple electric motor hybrid, wit the third motor capable of driving wheels, but also being connected to an engine to generate power.
If you license the image to A and B then neither has an exclusive license. Exclusive licensees can enforce the rights afforded a copyright owner without actual transfer of the copyright to the licensee.
Good cite. If I were their lawyer, other than the other comment's argument that the ticket is a conveyance, I'd argue that the ticket created an exclusive license to BMO, which would allow them to enforce the copyright, even though the actual transfer of ownership had not happened.
RTFA. The Article says she has not hired a lawyer. She filed this case pro se. All you need is $210. It'll get booted for "failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted."
And lawyers get fined for filing frivolous cases. They even get suspended or disbarred, but that's fairly extreme. The bar for a frivolous case is pretty high, and any decent attorney can find some kind of fraudulent inducement claim that'll survive summary judgement.
Monroe College is a for-profit institution, similar to the University of Pheonix. Here in New York, they advertise on the subway. This is generally bad. Monroe College offers degrees in vocational-type training (physician's assistant, dental assistant, etc.) It's basically a vocational school, not a university.
you can't patent an idea, you can only patent an invention, which is the implementation of an idea. Or at least fool an examiner into thinking you've figured out how to implement it. After looking at Woz's granted patents, the implementations are fairly well described, so he had some idea of how to implement it. It wasn't a case of patenting a cure for cancer without knowing how to actually cure cancer.
If you don;t share it with them, they couldn't have stolen it. If you keep your diary secret, it's not prior art, because it wasn't published. If you don't publicly use your ideas, those aren't prior art because there was no public use. Inventor's notebooks are only good for establishing the conception and reduction to practice of an invention.
Without transmissions, you don't have waves, and therefore no standing waves. However, you make a good point, because without proper boundary conditions, you don't have anything standing, so no standing waves. And I also remember doing my EMag homework, but that was 15 years go. (We didn't have Emag apps, we had signals and systems).
standing waves aren't caused by time, only transmissions. For instance, the standing waves in my microwave don't get stronger with time, only with higher transmission power or more transmitters.
except for the fact that one causes death and physical harm, and one's only mean words. The Founding Fathers were MOST concerned about freedom of anonymous speech, but they were really just thinking of in the political sense. The harshest criticisms of the government were usually done anonymously or pseudonomously in the 18th century. The "marketplace of ideas" was conceived because people assumed that trolls would be ignored.
There's actually a huge grey area. Time, place and manner are frequently taken into consideration by courts, as well as the content or commerciality of the speech, and the target of the speech, and the person doing the speaking. Free speech and first amendment rights are always brought up when a city wants to restrict sex-based businesses. However, since they're seen as commercial, that speech has less value in the public forum than a debate on our government's public policy. Governments can therefore, regulate the proper time and place for obscene or inappropriate speech (no adult bookstores within 500 foot of a school or church). Also, the manner of the speech can be regulated also. Public airwaves, i.e. radio and broadcast TV can be regulated by he FCC because the airwaves are a public resource and are leased by the federal government. That's why they can require mature material to be aired after 9:00. They also used to require a set amount of material to "benefit the public good", which is why radio and TV would air church services late saturday night and Sunday mornings, and why there were so many PSAs. Those rules have since been relaxed, but the rationale is still used. Public protests, even political ones, are frequently moved to protest areas, or required to have parade permits. This is to ensure that the protests don't cause a public nuisance or hazard. The same thing goes for the infamous "fire" in a crowded theatre.
There's whole books written on commercial speech - what's true (100 calories per serving), what's false (microsoft eats babies) , and what's puffery (Ford trucks are the greatest). Commercial speech gets less protection because it's used to sell things - not further the public discourse.
The New York Times Supreme Court Case re: Free speech held that when a public official was being criticized, the newspaper only had to refrain from saying things that it knew or should have known were false. Other cases have said that when the defamed person wasn't a public figure (i.e. a public official, a celebrity, or a person who sought the public eye), the bar against defamation was lower than when considering defamation against a non-public figure. And simply saying "Joe has herpes" may not be libel, depending on the context. Someone doing a comedy routine making jokes about Joe who says that Joe has herpes wouldn't be libel because no one would take it seriously - there's no "defamatory sting". You say that Joe has herpes in the middle of a medial report on NPR and it's probably defamation. That's why Howard Stern always has someone laughing at everything he says, to get people to thing it's a joke. And just stating that something's an opinion doesn't remove the slander - it's what people actually think that matters.
And don't forget, the truth is always a defense to a charge of defamation - if Joe has a cold sore and I write a story about how Joe has herpes, well, too bad for Joe, because it's true that Joe has herpes.
Regarding the threats, the common law varies from state to state, but you usually need a pattern of harassment or the imminent threat of harm. Standing in front of someone with a gun saying "I'm going to kill you" would likely be threatening, whereas saying it on the internet probably wouldn't because there's no imminent threat of bodily harm. (In New York, the person actually has to make some physical motion indicating that they are about to harm you - as my Torts professor used to say "words alone are not enough").
putting shielding around the antenna blocks the wireless signal. That's why it's called shielding. It shields.
And the extendable antenna doesn't move the transmission away from your head, the antenna transmits over the entire length, not just the tip. Extendable antennas increase reception by increasing the overall length of the antenna. My old sprint PCS phone was 1/4 wavelenth when collapsed and 5/8 wavelength when extended.
Because students are paying for a degree, not paying to learn something. Most of the CompSci programming taught in school is useless in the real world anyway. I started my first programming job while I was getting my EE degree. After working for a couple of years, I had recruiters calling me every day. However, even with some solid programming skills in all kinds of tech, many employers were only looking for a degreed programmer, and it didn't even matter what kind of degree. (I'm talking about you Southwest Airlines). Once I had my degree, all of the corporate programming jobs wanted to pay me as if I was a new graduate and didn't have 6 years of programming experience.
My point is that the GPL won't force improvements to the circuit to e released, because there's nothing keeping people from using the circuit however they want. You can't enforce the GPL on the circuit itself. Just the software and the physical schematic drawings
Any machines you make from the schematics are not covered under the GPL, only the schematics. As long as you use the schematics according go the GPL, you don't have to release any changes to the machine itself back into the public domain. Thus, as long as you're not modifying the schematics themselves, releasing them under the GPL is almost useless. And there's a lot of questions regarding the copyright protection afforded schematics as most of what schematics describe is functional,and not artistically creative.
It's too bad that the GNU license doesn't cover a machine. It's for copyright. Copyright would cover the RepRap diagrams and schematics, however, the functional elements of the RepRap aren't covered by copyright. I suppose they could have patented aspects of RepRap, and licensed the patents under the GNU license, but I haven't seen anything like that. Anyone seen any patents or patent applications on this? (Zach over at NYC Resistor has a working model, it something to see in person)
Books on patent claim drafting ("Landis on Claim Drafting" is a golden oldie), reading case law, working at a patent law firm. Or ask a friendly lawyer.
The patent bar is merely a test of your ability to do paperwork. It's all procedural, and doesn't cover anything substantive. You CAN file a patent for someone else after having taken the patent bar, but it won't be worth a crap until you have some experience drafting patents. No one tells you when you're studying for the patent bar why you use "comprising" instead of "consisting of" in the claims (it's because "comprising" is open ended, and doesn't foreclose any other elements being added to a claimed invention, "consisting of" limits your invention to the elements claimed)
By the way - the patent bar's easier than you think, take it asap. It's computerized, multiple choice, and the answers are all taken straight from the MPEP. They even give you a searchable MPEP in the test software. It's in PDF format, and split into chapters, but not too bad.
As for costs, it's $515 to file a patent for a company with less than 500 employees, double that for a large company. Legal fees range from $k-$20 for the initial application and $1500-$3k for each office action.
It's also about $2k for publication and issue fees after the patent is granted.
And yes, IAAPL.
I see you're a senior web developer. If, as you state, the Internet creates a de facto public domain, does that mean that everything you post to the Internet may be freely re-used by anybody, for any purpose? Because I just copied your employer's website and I'm using it to sell the same products as you.
Slashdot Mirror
Then you need to raise the voltage. Enough voltage and you can get a horse to deal cards.
Unfortunately, when you install Girlfriend 1.0, there's always conflicts. Also, Wife 1.0 is always trying to download a beta version of iBaby, and the nag screens saying "Do you want to install iBaby?" keep popping up.
I don't think most hybrid cars have a third electric motor coupled to an engine for generating electric power and also coupled to the wheels for driving the car also.
1. A hybrid vehicle, comprising: at least two pairs of wheels, each pair of wheels operable to receive power to propel said hybrid vehicle; a first alternating current (AC) electric motor, operable to provide power to a first pair of said at least two pairs of wheels to propel said hybrid vehicle; a second alternating current (AC) electric motor, operable to provide power to a second pair of said at least two pairs of wheels to propel said hybrid vehicle a third AC electric motor; an engine coupled to said third electric motor, operable to provide power to at least one of said two pairs of wheels to propel the hybrid vehicle, and/or to said third electric motor to drive the third electric motor to generate electric power; a first alternating current-direct current (AC-DC) converter having an AC side coupled to said first electric motor, operable to accept AC or DC current and convert the current to DC or AC current respectively; a second alternating current-direct current (AC-DC) converter having an AC side coupled to said second electric motor, operable to accept AC or DC current and convert the current to DC or AC current respectively; a third alternating current-direct current (AC-DC) converter coupled to said third electric motor, at least operable to accept AC current and convert the current to DC; an electrical storage device coupled to a DC side of said AC-DC converters, wherein the electrical storage device is operable to store DC energy received from said AC-DC converters and provide DC energy to at least said first and second AC-DC converters for providing power to at least said first and second electric motors; and a controller, operable to start and stop the engine to minimize fuel consumption. essentially, they patented a triple electric motor hybrid, wit the third motor capable of driving wheels, but also being connected to an engine to generate power.
The chain of priority goes back to 1999.
It's not the use that'd be a problem, it'd be the sale more than one year before the filng date. evean an offer for sakle can bar the applicaiton.
If you license the image to A and B then neither has an exclusive license. Exclusive licensees can enforce the rights afforded a copyright owner without actual transfer of the copyright to the licensee.
Good cite. If I were their lawyer, other than the other comment's argument that the ticket is a conveyance, I'd argue that the ticket created an exclusive license to BMO, which would allow them to enforce the copyright, even though the actual transfer of ownership had not happened.
RTFA. The Article says she has not hired a lawyer. She filed this case pro se. All you need is $210. It'll get booted for "failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted."
And lawyers get fined for filing frivolous cases. They even get suspended or disbarred, but that's fairly extreme. The bar for a frivolous case is pretty high, and any decent attorney can find some kind of fraudulent inducement claim that'll survive summary judgement.
Monroe College is a for-profit institution, similar to the University of Pheonix. Here in New York, they advertise on the subway. This is generally bad. Monroe College offers degrees in vocational-type training (physician's assistant, dental assistant, etc.) It's basically a vocational school, not a university.
Having worked with outsourced Indian coders, I, for one, am shocked that Indian engineers overpromised, underdelivered, and were overbudget.
you can't patent an idea, you can only patent an invention, which is the implementation of an idea. Or at least fool an examiner into thinking you've figured out how to implement it. After looking at Woz's granted patents, the implementations are fairly well described, so he had some idea of how to implement it. It wasn't a case of patenting a cure for cancer without knowing how to actually cure cancer.
If you don;t share it with them, they couldn't have stolen it. If you keep your diary secret, it's not prior art, because it wasn't published. If you don't publicly use your ideas, those aren't prior art because there was no public use. Inventor's notebooks are only good for establishing the conception and reduction to practice of an invention.
Without transmissions, you don't have waves, and therefore no standing waves. However, you make a good point, because without proper boundary conditions, you don't have anything standing, so no standing waves. And I also remember doing my EMag homework, but that was 15 years go. (We didn't have Emag apps, we had signals and systems).
standing waves aren't caused by time, only transmissions. For instance, the standing waves in my microwave don't get stronger with time, only with higher transmission power or more transmitters.
except for the fact that one causes death and physical harm, and one's only mean words. The Founding Fathers were MOST concerned about freedom of anonymous speech, but they were really just thinking of in the political sense. The harshest criticisms of the government were usually done anonymously or pseudonomously in the 18th century. The "marketplace of ideas" was conceived because people assumed that trolls would be ignored.
There's actually a huge grey area. Time, place and manner are frequently taken into consideration by courts, as well as the content or commerciality of the speech, and the target of the speech, and the person doing the speaking. Free speech and first amendment rights are always brought up when a city wants to restrict sex-based businesses. However, since they're seen as commercial, that speech has less value in the public forum than a debate on our government's public policy. Governments can therefore, regulate the proper time and place for obscene or inappropriate speech (no adult bookstores within 500 foot of a school or church). Also, the manner of the speech can be regulated also. Public airwaves, i.e. radio and broadcast TV can be regulated by he FCC because the airwaves are a public resource and are leased by the federal government. That's why they can require mature material to be aired after 9:00. They also used to require a set amount of material to "benefit the public good", which is why radio and TV would air church services late saturday night and Sunday mornings, and why there were so many PSAs. Those rules have since been relaxed, but the rationale is still used. Public protests, even political ones, are frequently moved to protest areas, or required to have parade permits. This is to ensure that the protests don't cause a public nuisance or hazard. The same thing goes for the infamous "fire" in a crowded theatre.
There's whole books written on commercial speech - what's true (100 calories per serving), what's false (microsoft eats babies) , and what's puffery (Ford trucks are the greatest). Commercial speech gets less protection because it's used to sell things - not further the public discourse.
The New York Times Supreme Court Case re: Free speech held that when a public official was being criticized, the newspaper only had to refrain from saying things that it knew or should have known were false. Other cases have said that when the defamed person wasn't a public figure (i.e. a public official, a celebrity, or a person who sought the public eye), the bar against defamation was lower than when considering defamation against a non-public figure. And simply saying "Joe has herpes" may not be libel, depending on the context. Someone doing a comedy routine making jokes about Joe who says that Joe has herpes wouldn't be libel because no one would take it seriously - there's no "defamatory sting". You say that Joe has herpes in the middle of a medial report on NPR and it's probably defamation. That's why Howard Stern always has someone laughing at everything he says, to get people to thing it's a joke. And just stating that something's an opinion doesn't remove the slander - it's what people actually think that matters.
And don't forget, the truth is always a defense to a charge of defamation - if Joe has a cold sore and I write a story about how Joe has herpes, well, too bad for Joe, because it's true that Joe has herpes.
Regarding the threats, the common law varies from state to state, but you usually need a pattern of harassment or the imminent threat of harm. Standing in front of someone with a gun saying "I'm going to kill you" would likely be threatening, whereas saying it on the internet probably wouldn't because there's no imminent threat of bodily harm. (In New York, the person actually has to make some physical motion indicating that they are about to harm you - as my Torts professor used to say "words alone are not enough").
putting shielding around the antenna blocks the wireless signal. That's why it's called shielding. It shields.
And the extendable antenna doesn't move the transmission away from your head, the antenna transmits over the entire length, not just the tip. Extendable antennas increase reception by increasing the overall length of the antenna. My old sprint PCS phone was 1/4 wavelenth when collapsed and 5/8 wavelength when extended.
Because students are paying for a degree, not paying to learn something. Most of the CompSci programming taught in school is useless in the real world anyway. I started my first programming job while I was getting my EE degree. After working for a couple of years, I had recruiters calling me every day. However, even with some solid programming skills in all kinds of tech, many employers were only looking for a degreed programmer, and it didn't even matter what kind of degree. (I'm talking about you Southwest Airlines). Once I had my degree, all of the corporate programming jobs wanted to pay me as if I was a new graduate and didn't have 6 years of programming experience.
My point is that the GPL won't force improvements to the circuit to e released, because there's nothing keeping people from using the circuit however they want. You can't enforce the GPL on the circuit itself. Just the software and the physical schematic drawings
Any machines you make from the schematics are not covered under the GPL, only the schematics. As long as you use the schematics according go the GPL, you don't have to release any changes to the machine itself back into the public domain. Thus, as long as you're not modifying the schematics themselves, releasing them under the GPL is almost useless. And there's a lot of questions regarding the copyright protection afforded schematics as most of what schematics describe is functional ,and not artistically creative.
It's too bad that the GNU license doesn't cover a machine. It's for copyright. Copyright would cover the RepRap diagrams and schematics, however, the functional elements of the RepRap aren't covered by copyright. I suppose they could have patented aspects of RepRap, and licensed the patents under the GNU license, but I haven't seen anything like that. Anyone seen any patents or patent applications on this? (Zach over at NYC Resistor has a working model, it something to see in person)
Books on patent claim drafting ("Landis on Claim Drafting" is a golden oldie), reading case law, working at a patent law firm. Or ask a friendly lawyer.
The patent bar is merely a test of your ability to do paperwork. It's all procedural, and doesn't cover anything substantive. You CAN file a patent for someone else after having taken the patent bar, but it won't be worth a crap until you have some experience drafting patents. No one tells you when you're studying for the patent bar why you use "comprising" instead of "consisting of" in the claims (it's because "comprising" is open ended, and doesn't foreclose any other elements being added to a claimed invention, "consisting of" limits your invention to the elements claimed) By the way - the patent bar's easier than you think, take it asap. It's computerized, multiple choice, and the answers are all taken straight from the MPEP. They even give you a searchable MPEP in the test software. It's in PDF format, and split into chapters, but not too bad. As for costs, it's $515 to file a patent for a company with less than 500 employees, double that for a large company. Legal fees range from $k-$20 for the initial application and $1500-$3k for each office action. It's also about $2k for publication and issue fees after the patent is granted. And yes, IAAPL.
I see you're a senior web developer. If, as you state, the Internet creates a de facto public domain, does that mean that everything you post to the Internet may be freely re-used by anybody, for any purpose? Because I just copied your employer's website and I'm using it to sell the same products as you.