He should convene a press conference, explain to them why he is about to do what he is going to do, then slash his own throat in front of the press core. That will get their attention.
All you bleeding heart liberals are too stupid to realize there is nothing to differentiate this man from George W. Bush. And as for copyrights & patents....he is showing himself to be a pimp for corporation.
Against the people at every turn. We're not talking about legality. We're talking about the Constitution that says a fine cannot outweigh the crime. Right now, in our courts. Copyright violation is a greater crime than rape. Think about that before you reply...
First of all. I don't like cozying up to the entertainment companies by this administration. Joe Biden was always an industry shill from his senate days. He was the moron that wanted to force software onto all our computers so RIAA/MPAA could make sure we are not pirates. Joe biden has pushed for so many of the most ridiculous bills in favor of big entertainment that I have lost count. Thankfully the bills were so ridiculous that many did not have much chance of passing so this is not a surprise.
And you think Rick Perry is any better? Lets see. The chief lobbyist for Merck was Perry's chief of staff, Merck donated to Perry and got their bidding done to the tune of and executive order to mandate their vaccine in Texas. Billionaire Harold Simmons gave Perry $1.2 Million in donations and for that he got a contract with Texas for his Nuclear waste company to setup shop in texas. This scheme required Perry to rig the laws in Texas so that "Private companies companies in Texas were able to own a nuclear wast dump license, and we did that, Then we got another law passed so that only one company can own a license, we were the only one that applied" That is from the horses mouth (Harold Simmons) So much for the free market eh? James Dannenbaum gave Rick Perry $320,000 what did he get? Multiple state transportation contracts and appointment to UT board of regents. Millionaire chicken man Joe Sanderson gave Perry 165,000 he received and $500,000 in tax payers money for a grant for a hatchery and chicken processing plant. Auto man Bj "red" McCombs gave Perry $400.000 he received a state pledge for $25 million per year in tax payer subsidies. I could go on and on and on but I think you get the point by now.
At least it clear that this administration is bought by one major industry. How many industries have bought Rick Perry? Many
So I would say pick your poison.
Your advocacy for giving recreating Ma-Bell and for powerful monopolies in general is astounding and quite an anti-free-market stance. The free market works best when there is competition. Duopolies damage the free market. Monopolies damage the free market. A free market cannot work if there is a lack of consumer choice. When companies get so powerful they then have the power to push other players out of the free market thereby reducing choice and dwindling the marketplace to the point where there is no free market. The basic fundamental of the free market is the ability for consumers to vote with their wallet. Take that away and the free market is no longer a free market. When customers are fee to chose between many players in the free market then you have a healthy free market. When they can only chose between 3 players the free market suffers. You argument that government blocking monopolies, duopolies, and triopolies is bad is ridiculous and quit frankly against free market principles.
I am no fan of the TSA however I do remember the massive outcry for the "gubmint to do more to secure the american people" after 911. So if we get rid of the TSA and we hire Joe the plumber to do airport security or just leave it up to the airlines them maybe if we get another terrorist attack the people will shut up and not bitch about lax security. You been screeming for more security now you get it and now you bitch about it. I remember that security was up to the airlines right up untill terrorists killed 3000 people. So lets put security back into the hands of the airlines and shut up about wanting perfect security.
Yeah because in your world open source should not exist. Only Dear Leader Jobs and his minions are the only ones should be able to write code. Fuck this 'all your code are belong to us' mentality. You Apple goons that are supporting this hostility towards open source should be ashamed of yourselves. When Apple takes from open source and builds upon it its ok with you goons, When Apple tries to sue open source to oblivion thats OK too. The hypocrisy is incredible. The notion that you cannot sit down in front of your computer and write code without Dear Leader Jobs treating you for patents is ludicrous. I HATE this shit.
Well its obvious you are anti Google and personally I would wager that you are against open source because that is the bigger picture here. What Microsoft and Apple are doing is trying to stop software freedom from becoming mainstream. They do not want this genie out running around out there. The notion that you can't sit down at your computer and write code without treading on Microsoft and Apple's software patents is sickening and should be to any developer out there.
Do i seriously have to break it down for you or are you just cynical? If you write code that has similar functions to Apple and Microsoft then you will get sued for patents. Microsoft and Apple has demonstrated that. Anyone that sues over software patents is in effect claiming ownership of someone else's code. In other words if you write code that does an action that they have patented then you will (1) get banned from the marketplace or (2) have to pay for a software patent license to use the code you wrote. Or at the very least distribute it. That is claiming ownership of someone else's code. Look Microsoft is charging numerous vendors license fees for using Linux on their devices. See Buffalo, Tom Tom, Amazon, Barnes and Noble (they are fighting it), and many others. Because they claim Linux violates the precious software patents. Microsoft says that those who are using Linux are "running on an undisclosed balance sheet". There are countless examples of these egregious activities by Apple and Microsoft in the marketplace.
how in the world is Google waging the battle here? Wasn't it Apple that launched the suits against Google's partners? Going by your logic Apple started a proxy war against Google through Google's partners.
This stupid false-equivalence is ridiculous. It is at best cynical to state that Apple's and Microsoft's thinks their offensive use of patents is a defensive use. Lemme ask you this. If someone came into your house and shot someone then claim they were just defending themself would you be so quick swallow their arguments? Just in case you weren't aware patents can be used offensively or defensively Can you cite one instance Just one where Google has used patents offensively? By the way offensive use of patents is the initiating of a patent action against some one. Defensive use of patents is suing someone after they have initiated and action against you first. Just in case you were unaware. There is a difference between stockpiling patents for defensive use and actually initiating patent actions against others. The difference is stark.
Hey goon, It was nerds that created computing. The notion that you can't sit down in front of your computer and write code that is totally different form what Apple or Microsoft wrote but you get dragged into court because these gatekeepers want to claim ownership of your code that they didn't write is ridiculous. Screw them and all the goons who mindlessly support this 'all your code are belong to us' brigade. screw em.
Please cite one instance of Google launching a patent infringement assertion against anyone without them or their partners being attacked first. Just one instance. If you cannot then your argument has absolutely no merit.
That's because nearly all of Apple's lawsuits center around hardware patents, or physical design patents. In fact, I don't think they have sued anyone over software patents yet.
Kind of hard to use them as a poster boy for Software patent reform when they don't go near it but rarely, if ever.
What!!??
system or method to unlock phone by swiping to unlock. (sued Samsung)
method of organizing pictures in a photo manager (sued Samsung)
THen there is:-
cartoon drawing of a square with rounded corners with a flat screen. (sued Samsung)
Here is some more for you to chew on.
#7,362,331: Time-based, non-constant translation of user interface objects between states. Filed in 2001, this patent covers basic animated movement of objects in graphics user interfaces; the core "innovation" seems to be that the function for determining the object's velocity is not constant. Apple has patented acceleration of objects on the screen.
#7,479,949: Touch screen device, method, and graphical user interface for determining commands by applying heuristics. This patent was filed in April, 2008; Steven Jobs is the first on a long list of inventors. This patent claims the use of heuristics to determine whether a finger movement on a touchscreen display is vertical, diagonal, or is a "next item" selection.
#7,657,849: Unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image. This patent (2005) covers pretty much what it says; it's requirement for "moving an unlock image" along the path suggests a fairly straightforward workaround might be possible.
#7,469,381: List scrolling and document translation, scaling, and rotation on a touch-screen display (2007). This one is complex, but seems to cover the practice of "bouncing" the display when scrolled past the end of a document or list.
#5,920,726: System and method for managing power conditions within a digital camera device (1997). This is a hardware-related patent covering the process of powering down a digital camera in response to a low-power situation.
#7,633,076: Automated response to and sensing of user activity in portable devices (2006). This is a technique for filtering out touchscreen events resulting from putting a phone to one's ear. It requires the existence of a "proximity sensor" to determine whether a human is sufficiently close to the device.
#5,848,105: GMSK signal processors for improved communications capacity and quality (1996) is a signal-processing algorithm meant to improve interference rejection.
#7,383,453: Conserving power by reducing voltage supplied to an instruction-processing portion of a processor (2005). This hardware patent appears to be well described by its title; it covers a processor which can turn off its clock and reduce its operating voltage.
#5,455,599: Object-oriented graphic system (1995). By a broad reading, this patent would appear to cover just about any graphical system which maps between objects stored in memory and a representation on the display.
#6,424,354: Object-oriented event notification system with listener registration of both interests and methods (1999). The highly innovative technique of allowing one object to register an interest in changes to a second object and receive notifications is covered. This patent is owned by the "Object Technology Licensing Corporation" which is located at 1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino - strangely enough, that's where Apple is located too.
Additionally, Apple has filed with the US International Trade Commission with the purpose of blocking the import of HTC's products into the US. That filing names a different, generally older, and more fundamental set of patents:
#5,481,721: Method for providing automatic and dynamic translation of object oriented programming language-based message passing into operation system message passing using proxy objects (1994). This patent covers sending messages between two objects in
UPS has delivered my package to random neighbors on 2 occasions. At work FedEX delivered one of our packages to the people in the adjacent suite. This all happened this year. The insinuation that UPS and FedEx does not make the same mistakes is laughable at best.
Sorry fail. The insinuation was that Samsung wast the first to file a suit. That is not the case. Apple went on the attack first and the article you linked to shows exactly that.
The practices of Apple and its goons bring to mind the practices of Scientology and its goons. Sue sue sue sue sue, Send your thugs to the home of person in suspected possession of missing iPhone to masquerade as police. Deploy goons all over the Internet to spread propoganda about your cause/products and to destroy the credibility of others that criticize said cause/products.
From the very first paragraph of the link you posted.
April 22 (Bloomberg) -- Samsung Electronics Co. said it sued Apple Inc. claiming patent infringement, a week after the iPhone maker filed a complaint in U.S. federal court alleging the South Korean company copied its products.
Did you just google "Samsung sue Apple" and posted the first link that you found without reading the article? Wow.
I don't understand why Apple goons keep scratching and clawing in order to prove an invalid point. Its really drone-like behavior.
You mean the design that Apple copied? So in your world its OK for Apple to steal the concepts of others but if anyone makes a design that looks like the concept that Apple stole that's not OK? Wow just WOW.
To deny the obvious design cloning is to reach an extreme level of Apple-hating that even I can't understand.
You want to know why people are pissed about this and seemingly Apple-hating?. Its primarily because of people like you. You are claiming that the design is unique to Apple and that tablets looked different until the iPad came along. But you fail to acknowledge the obvious prior art What I want to know from you is how is it that its OK for Apple to steal the ideas of others yet no one else can make anything that looks remotely close the the design that Apple stole. Where is the outrage from you about Apple stealing design concepts from others? It is this hypocrisy that gets people bent out of shape leaving you to conclude that people are Apple-haters for not drinking the Apple Koolaid. Its very Scientology like.
Apparently this is what some of the cable companies do with their on-demand. Track what uses watch then target them with personalized ads. And in this case you are paying cable companies for the privilege of getting targed ads.
I makes me wonder who is really behind this "You are the product" theme that is recently appearing on blogs and discussion groups. We know there are some unscrupulous entities that are very efficient at spreading false outrage about their competitors behind the scenes. I remember a particular entity that was doing a similar thing with the "ZOMG Open Source offers no indemnity" meme. That same entity was also responsible for rounding up competitors of Google to file antitrust complaints against Google and is currently running an ad campaign attempting to scare Gmail users that the big bad Google is reading their email. Now that entity has sued Android device manufacturers claiming "if you use our product then we "Indemnify" you from lawsuits. The open source product does not offer indemnity see? we are suing them and they have to defend themselves." I think a very sleezy entity is quite possibly behind this.
Slashdot Mirror
He should convene a press conference, explain to them why he is about to do what he is going to do, then slash his own throat in front of the press core. That will get their attention.
But Obama is a f***kwad....
All you bleeding heart liberals are too stupid to realize there is nothing to differentiate this man from George W. Bush. And as for copyrights & patents....he is showing himself to be a pimp for corporation.
Against the people at every turn. We're not talking about legality. We're talking about the Constitution that says a fine cannot outweigh the crime. Right now, in our courts. Copyright violation is a greater crime than rape. Think about that before you reply...
First of all. I don't like cozying up to the entertainment companies by this administration. Joe Biden was always an industry shill from his senate days. He was the moron that wanted to force software onto all our computers so RIAA/MPAA could make sure we are not pirates. Joe biden has pushed for so many of the most ridiculous bills in favor of big entertainment that I have lost count. Thankfully the bills were so ridiculous that many did not have much chance of passing so this is not a surprise.
And you think Rick Perry is any better? Lets see. The chief lobbyist for Merck was Perry's chief of staff, Merck donated to Perry and got their bidding done to the tune of and executive order to mandate their vaccine in Texas. Billionaire Harold Simmons gave Perry $1.2 Million in donations and for that he got a contract with Texas for his Nuclear waste company to setup shop in texas. This scheme required Perry to rig the laws in Texas so that "Private companies companies in Texas were able to own a nuclear wast dump license, and we did that, Then we got another law passed so that only one company can own a license, we were the only one that applied" That is from the horses mouth (Harold Simmons) So much for the free market eh? James Dannenbaum gave Rick Perry $320,000 what did he get? Multiple state transportation contracts and appointment to UT board of regents. Millionaire chicken man Joe Sanderson gave Perry 165,000 he received and $500,000 in tax payers money for a grant for a hatchery and chicken processing plant. Auto man Bj "red" McCombs gave Perry $400.000 he received a state pledge for $25 million per year in tax payer subsidies. I could go on and on and on but I think you get the point by now.
At least it clear that this administration is bought by one major industry. How many industries have bought Rick Perry? Many So I would say pick your poison.
Your advocacy for giving recreating Ma-Bell and for powerful monopolies in general is astounding and quite an anti-free-market stance. The free market works best when there is competition. Duopolies damage the free market. Monopolies damage the free market. A free market cannot work if there is a lack of consumer choice. When companies get so powerful they then have the power to push other players out of the free market thereby reducing choice and dwindling the marketplace to the point where there is no free market. The basic fundamental of the free market is the ability for consumers to vote with their wallet. Take that away and the free market is no longer a free market. When customers are fee to chose between many players in the free market then you have a healthy free market. When they can only chose between 3 players the free market suffers. You argument that government blocking monopolies, duopolies, and triopolies is bad is ridiculous and quit frankly against free market principles.
I am no fan of the TSA however I do remember the massive outcry for the "gubmint to do more to secure the american people" after 911. So if we get rid of the TSA and we hire Joe the plumber to do airport security or just leave it up to the airlines them maybe if we get another terrorist attack the people will shut up and not bitch about lax security. You been screeming for more security now you get it and now you bitch about it. I remember that security was up to the airlines right up untill terrorists killed 3000 people. So lets put security back into the hands of the airlines and shut up about wanting perfect security.
Yeah because in your world open source should not exist. Only Dear Leader Jobs and his minions are the only ones should be able to write code. Fuck this 'all your code are belong to us' mentality. You Apple goons that are supporting this hostility towards open source should be ashamed of yourselves. When Apple takes from open source and builds upon it its ok with you goons, When Apple tries to sue open source to oblivion thats OK too. The hypocrisy is incredible. The notion that you cannot sit down in front of your computer and write code without Dear Leader Jobs treating you for patents is ludicrous. I HATE this shit.
Well its obvious you are anti Google and personally I would wager that you are against open source because that is the bigger picture here. What Microsoft and Apple are doing is trying to stop software freedom from becoming mainstream. They do not want this genie out running around out there. The notion that you can't sit down at your computer and write code without treading on Microsoft and Apple's software patents is sickening and should be to any developer out there.
Obvious troll is obvious troll.
Do i seriously have to break it down for you or are you just cynical? If you write code that has similar functions to Apple and Microsoft then you will get sued for patents. Microsoft and Apple has demonstrated that. Anyone that sues over software patents is in effect claiming ownership of someone else's code. In other words if you write code that does an action that they have patented then you will (1) get banned from the marketplace or (2) have to pay for a software patent license to use the code you wrote. Or at the very least distribute it. That is claiming ownership of someone else's code. Look Microsoft is charging numerous vendors license fees for using Linux on their devices. See Buffalo, Tom Tom, Amazon, Barnes and Noble (they are fighting it), and many others. Because they claim Linux violates the precious software patents. Microsoft says that those who are using Linux are "running on an undisclosed balance sheet". There are countless examples of these egregious activities by Apple and Microsoft in the marketplace.
how in the world is Google waging the battle here? Wasn't it Apple that launched the suits against Google's partners? Going by your logic Apple started a proxy war against Google through Google's partners.
This stupid false-equivalence is ridiculous. It is at best cynical to state that Apple's and Microsoft's thinks their offensive use of patents is a defensive use. Lemme ask you this. If someone came into your house and shot someone then claim they were just defending themself would you be so quick swallow their arguments? Just in case you weren't aware patents can be used offensively or defensively Can you cite one instance Just one where Google has used patents offensively? By the way offensive use of patents is the initiating of a patent action against some one. Defensive use of patents is suing someone after they have initiated and action against you first. Just in case you were unaware. There is a difference between stockpiling patents for defensive use and actually initiating patent actions against others. The difference is stark.
Hey goon, It was nerds that created computing. The notion that you can't sit down in front of your computer and write code that is totally different form what Apple or Microsoft wrote but you get dragged into court because these gatekeepers want to claim ownership of your code that they didn't write is ridiculous. Screw them and all the goons who mindlessly support this 'all your code are belong to us' brigade. screw em.
How in the world does your analogy fit into this discussion? Please elaborate.
Please cite one instance of Google launching a patent infringement assertion against anyone without them or their partners being attacked first. Just one instance. If you cannot then your argument has absolutely no merit.
That's because nearly all of Apple's lawsuits center around hardware patents, or physical design patents. In fact, I don't think they have sued anyone over software patents yet.
Kind of hard to use them as a poster boy for Software patent reform when they don't go near it but rarely, if ever.
What!!??
system or method to unlock phone by swiping to unlock. (sued Samsung)
method of organizing pictures in a photo manager (sued Samsung)
THen there is :-
cartoon drawing of a square with rounded corners with a flat screen. (sued Samsung)
Here is some more for you to chew on.
#7,362,331: Time-based, non-constant translation of user interface objects between states. Filed in 2001, this patent covers basic animated movement of objects in graphics user interfaces; the core "innovation" seems to be that the function for determining the object's velocity is not constant. Apple has patented acceleration of objects on the screen.
#7,479,949: Touch screen device, method, and graphical user interface for determining commands by applying heuristics. This patent was filed in April, 2008; Steven Jobs is the first on a long list of inventors. This patent claims the use of heuristics to determine whether a finger movement on a touchscreen display is vertical, diagonal, or is a "next item" selection.
#7,657,849: Unlocking a device by performing gestures on an unlock image. This patent (2005) covers pretty much what it says; it's requirement for "moving an unlock image" along the path suggests a fairly straightforward workaround might be possible.
#7,469,381: List scrolling and document translation, scaling, and rotation on a touch-screen display (2007). This one is complex, but seems to cover the practice of "bouncing" the display when scrolled past the end of a document or list.
#5,920,726: System and method for managing power conditions within a digital camera device (1997). This is a hardware-related patent covering the process of powering down a digital camera in response to a low-power situation.
#7,633,076: Automated response to and sensing of user activity in portable devices (2006). This is a technique for filtering out touchscreen events resulting from putting a phone to one's ear. It requires the existence of a "proximity sensor" to determine whether a human is sufficiently close to the device.
#5,848,105: GMSK signal processors for improved communications capacity and quality (1996) is a signal-processing algorithm meant to improve interference rejection.
#7,383,453: Conserving power by reducing voltage supplied to an instruction-processing portion of a processor (2005). This hardware patent appears to be well described by its title; it covers a processor which can turn off its clock and reduce its operating voltage.
#5,455,599: Object-oriented graphic system (1995). By a broad reading, this patent would appear to cover just about any graphical system which maps between objects stored in memory and a representation on the display.
#6,424,354: Object-oriented event notification system with listener registration of both interests and methods (1999). The highly innovative technique of allowing one object to register an interest in changes to a second object and receive notifications is covered. This patent is owned by the "Object Technology Licensing Corporation" which is located at 1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino - strangely enough, that's where Apple is located too.
Additionally, Apple has filed with the US International Trade Commission with the purpose of blocking the import of HTC's products into the US. That filing names a different, generally older, and more fundamental set of patents:
#5,481,721: Method for providing automatic and dynamic translation of object oriented programming language-based message passing into operation system message passing using proxy objects (1994). This patent covers sending messages between two objects in
UPS has delivered my package to random neighbors on 2 occasions. At work FedEX delivered one of our packages to the people in the adjacent suite. This all happened this year. The insinuation that UPS and FedEx does not make the same mistakes is laughable at best.
So if I invent something new that used a wheel I can get a 21 year monopoly on the wheel? how the hell does that work? ...confused.
Sorry fail. The insinuation was that Samsung wast the first to file a suit. That is not the case. Apple went on the attack first and the article you linked to shows exactly that.
The practices of Apple and its goons bring to mind the practices of Scientology and its goons. Sue sue sue sue sue, Send your thugs to the home of person in suspected possession of missing iPhone to masquerade as police. Deploy goons all over the Internet to spread propoganda about your cause/products and to destroy the credibility of others that criticize said cause/products.
From the very first paragraph of the link you posted.
April 22 (Bloomberg) -- Samsung Electronics Co. said it sued Apple Inc. claiming patent infringement, a week after the iPhone maker filed a complaint in U.S. federal court alleging the South Korean company copied its products.
Did you just google "Samsung sue Apple" and posted the first link that you found without reading the article? Wow.
I don't understand why Apple goons keep scratching and clawing in order to prove an invalid point. Its really drone-like behavior.
You mean the design that Apple copied? So in your world its OK for Apple to steal the concepts of others but if anyone makes a design that looks like the concept that Apple stole that's not OK? Wow just WOW.
Android devices before and after the iPhone/iPad
To deny the obvious design cloning is to reach an extreme level of Apple-hating that even I can't understand.
You want to know why people are pissed about this and seemingly Apple-hating?. Its primarily because of people like you. You are claiming that the design is unique to Apple and that tablets looked different until the iPad came along. But you fail to acknowledge the obvious prior art What I want to know from you is how is it that its OK for Apple to steal the ideas of others yet no one else can make anything that looks remotely close the the design that Apple stole. Where is the outrage from you about Apple stealing design concepts from others? It is this hypocrisy that gets people bent out of shape leaving you to conclude that people are Apple-haters for not drinking the Apple Koolaid. Its very Scientology like.
I'm interested to hear your thoughts on this thanks.
Apparently this is what some of the cable companies do with their on-demand. Track what uses watch then target them with personalized ads. And in this case you are paying cable companies for the privilege of getting targed ads.
I makes me wonder who is really behind this "You are the product" theme that is recently appearing on blogs and discussion groups. We know there are some unscrupulous entities that are very efficient at spreading false outrage about their competitors behind the scenes. I remember a particular entity that was doing a similar thing with the "ZOMG Open Source offers no indemnity" meme. That same entity was also responsible for rounding up competitors of Google to file antitrust complaints against Google and is currently running an ad campaign attempting to scare Gmail users that the big bad Google is reading their email. Now that entity has sued Android device manufacturers claiming "if you use our product then we "Indemnify" you from lawsuits. The open source product does not offer indemnity see? we are suing them and they have to defend themselves." I think a very sleezy entity is quite possibly behind this.
Its very easy. Just don't use ANY of Google's. Plain and simple. Or maybe you could PAY Google for the use of their services. How bout that?