It would seem the FAA has a legitimate interest in regulating whats flying in US airspace. If something represents a danger to public safety the FAA needs to be able to stop it from flying. It is true on the other hand that at some point (altitude) the FAA's jurisdiction must end, I would say that as long as it is being launched from the US they get a say... There are also probably some international treaties that would provide guidence.
I think it is a matter of thier test schedule not being fast enough to meet the time conditions of the X-prize, they are saying they are in it for the long run and aren't going to sacrifice thier buisness model just for a prize. I'm sure if the x-prize deadline was extended they would change thier tone...
Doesn't this create excellent oppurtunities for people to market products that interfere with the RFID signals? I'm not well versed on the technology but how hard would it be for someone to make a radio jammer that prevented the reading of RFID tags on their person/car/hous? Could make alot of money selling to privacy nuts and those with neferious reasons for wanting to get around the tags...
Is there anything to prevent this?
I don't know much about the patent laws but it seems to me that companies that use concepts that someone patented, and who implemented them with no knowledge of the patent shouldn't be able to be sued. I shouldn't be expected to research to determine if the solution I came up with on my own is patented. The burden of proof should require that the infringment was wilful. As a pratical matter someone who didn't wilfully infringe in the first place would have to be able to coninue using what ever was patented...
Maybe I just don't see the big picture...
How hard would it be for someone to design an ATM machine that would make it more dificulty to conceal a card reader... or better yet one that made it impossible to insert your card if anything is attached... it would seem that with some common sense a designer good create some pretty good safe guards... or am I just missing something?
Who actually thought that the US goverment would sucsesfully regulate spam? Its ludicrious, how hard is it for a spammer to set up a server in a country that doesn't enforce such laws?
the bill provides the exception "that is sold and registered in this state and whose gross vehicle weight is less than ten thousand pounds." So the simple solution is to just make sure your new uber SUV is over 5 tons and your all set...
Slashdot Mirror
It would seem the FAA has a legitimate interest in regulating whats flying in US airspace. If something represents a danger to public safety the FAA needs to be able to stop it from flying. It is true on the other hand that at some point (altitude) the FAA's jurisdiction must end, I would say that as long as it is being launched from the US they get a say... There are also probably some international treaties that would provide guidence.
I think it is a matter of thier test schedule not being fast enough to meet the time conditions of the X-prize, they are saying they are in it for the long run and aren't going to sacrifice thier buisness model just for a prize. I'm sure if the x-prize deadline was extended they would change thier tone...
Doesn't this create excellent oppurtunities for people to market products that interfere with the RFID signals? I'm not well versed on the technology but how hard would it be for someone to make a radio jammer that prevented the reading of RFID tags on their person/car/hous? Could make alot of money selling to privacy nuts and those with neferious reasons for wanting to get around the tags... Is there anything to prevent this?
I don't know much about the patent laws but it seems to me that companies that use concepts that someone patented, and who implemented them with no knowledge of the patent shouldn't be able to be sued. I shouldn't be expected to research to determine if the solution I came up with on my own is patented. The burden of proof should require that the infringment was wilful. As a pratical matter someone who didn't wilfully infringe in the first place would have to be able to coninue using what ever was patented... Maybe I just don't see the big picture...
How hard would it be for someone to design an ATM machine that would make it more dificulty to conceal a card reader... or better yet one that made it impossible to insert your card if anything is attached... it would seem that with some common sense a designer good create some pretty good safe guards... or am I just missing something?
Who actually thought that the US goverment would sucsesfully regulate spam? Its ludicrious, how hard is it for a spammer to set up a server in a country that doesn't enforce such laws?
the bill provides the exception "that is sold and registered in this state and whose gross vehicle weight is less than ten thousand pounds." So the simple solution is to just make sure your new uber SUV is over 5 tons and your all set...