Like I said, he paid no attention to the claims, and actually the argument states the claims are pointless because they are impossible. But can the claims be used as stated if the data is of a non-random format. If the claims themselves reflect truly impossible claims then instead of bitching about it on a website, they should write a nice long letter explaining the impossibility of the claims (not the spec), to the appropriate individuals at the patent office. I point out for the thousandth time on slashdot that there is a re-exam process where the patentability of a claim can be re-checked. Too many people complain about the patent system, but too few of you do anything about it.
Well even if effected might be proper, and I would have to re-read to be sure. I am still pretty sure affect as used is improper though since it is being used as a noun.
The problem with your reference site is too much emphasis on the spec and not enough on the claims. The claims seem to avoid that area of random data, since it isn't mentioned in the claims he shows. Remember, claims not spec. If I disclose my invention in the spec, the rest of it could go off on a total tangent, though usually the "tangent" gets editted out before publishing.
For effect we are going to analyze the broadest claim the way it should be analyzed. Get out your notebooks cause you'll want to understand this before you complain about another patent.
1. A method of operating a video game including a game character controlled by a player, the method comprising:
This "preamble" tells us we are dealing with a mode of operating a video game. It further says that there is a game character and that said game character is player controlled. Straight forward so far, but we have limited ourself to the realms of video games and the user controlled characters there-in.
(a) setting a sanity level of the game character;
We are now assigning a sanity level to the game character that was mentioned before. This means that some sort of value for sanity is being set, this is somewhat similar to what would be done for health, mana, or the like; however, it is important to note at the same time that it IS DIFFERENT.
(b) modifying the sanity level of the game, character during game play according to occurrences in the game, wherein a modifying amount of is determined based on a charater reaction and an amount of character preparation;
We are now changing the sanity level for the character during game play, this limits the setting to occuring while the game is actually being played. Now there are two things that determine the modification amount: (1) characters reaction and (2) amount of character preparation. This is now two more limitations that must be met in any prior art (including possible multiple references for 35 USC 103(a) obviousness).
(c) controlling game play according to the sanity level of the game character, game play being controlled at least by varying game effects according to the game charater sanity level
Now the game is affected by the sanity level of the mentioned game character. Now it states that at the very least game effects will be varied according to the game character's sanity level. This means that some degree of changes in some characters of game play will be changed based on this level.
Now to defend this over mentioned prior art, Nethack people keep mentioning the hallucination potion. This has 0 to do with the patent if that is true. The system used for Nethack could simply have stated, if potion=TRUE then change the effects. This is therefore different then the current patent, unless someone can show otherwise that the system as claimed above is EXACTLY how Nethack was done.
This similar thing goes for other games. If they used different methods then it would not preclude the patenability of this patent. Remember prior art needs to be before the filing date on this application, also remember that if the system used in other games is unknown, and unpublished the individual companies would have to make aware that they invented such a system to preclude patentability and get the patent nulled.
Remember what is in the claim is what the patent is for and do not confuse the spec for what the patent is good for. The specification is put there so the public knows the "Best Mode" for the invention. Any questions, please feel free to ask.
He is correct the uses are not proper. Remember AFFECT is the verb. EFFECT is the noun. Therefore EFFECTED should never be an appropriate word, it would be AFFECTED. And the use of AFFECT is as a verb so it would be EFFECT. Your own definitions there told you that.
The Spec means nothing. The considerably broader claims are what is actually covered by the patent. That spec could read on several embodiments of the same system and in the end only one of those embodiments may be specifically covered by this patent, or the claims could be so broad to cover then all. However, their coverage is not limited to these embodiments, so any other system that reads along the claims could still be infringing the patent. As I have said tons of times, please read patent law and procedure of the United States. There are many things that you (the Slashdot community) really DO NOT KNOW or UNDERSTAND.
Non-interactive elements? I haven't played many games where cut-scenes overrun the game. Anyone have some good examples of this...
The Right to Win.
Here is something else I haven't seen, is an impossible to win game. I am sure they exist somewhere, the game the developer screwed up so you couldn't beat, or intentially made that way...
The Right to Instructions.
Yes everyone has a right to know how to play. This is another one of those where I fail to have much of an example.
The Right to Feedback.
Ok this almost goes against the way many games work based on their example. I mean if every game kept giving you feedback then what would be the fun of learning? Seriously, if RTS or RPGs gave too much feedback everyone would win them all the time, and there is something to be said for those people who actually PLAYED the game.
The Right To Motivation.
Sometimes the game isn't suppose to tell you what to do. I don't see many games without motivations, the motivations may be obscure but they usually exist.
The Right to Make Decisions.
This really depends on how far you want to take the idea of decisions. Both KotoR I and II give you plenty of chances to make decisions that effect the game. Actually most RPGs allow for this to some extent, even to the point of near total independence (Morrowind). But some degree of control is needed in some games, and the way some FPS and RTS are set up there need to be minimal decision making beyond standard gameplay decisions. BTW, are there seriously people who don't know what Whack-a-mole is?
The Right to a Swift Death.
Now I cannot be certain with respect to all games, but by and large this mostly applies to RPGs I would believe. Most mission based games let you know of failure pretty immediately and some RPGs let you know if you made a no-no (Morrowind again) so you could go back. I do not believe death is really a necessity hear, but some sort of a message saying OOPs would work.
The Right To Control Cut-Scenes.
Ok this one I can kind of see. There are too few games that let you rewatch cut-scenes at will and pausing would be nice for when that pesky phone rings. Truly what I want from cut scenes are Dark Forces 2: Jedi Knight cut-scenes. Live acting how I miss thee. It added a different dimension and flavor to the cut-scenes and games and is something that should be considered eventhough it is probably a cost issue.
The Right to Quit, Pause, Save and Resume the Game.
No No No. Games need to be a bit hard. What challenge is there if i can hit save every two seconds. Besides this is only a problem in some games and probably overstated here. By saving whenever and wherever you have the situation that everyone gets into in playing on emulators where you save-state every two seconds and do things perfectly without fail. I mean isn't this how the 8 minute (or however long) Mario 3 was done.
The Right to Choose Not to Save the Game.
Can someone give me an example of this. Everygame I think of with auto-saves has an auto-save slot and you can still have your own save slots. Also, a bit of whining tying this back into a previous "right". I do not see the problem they do with this. Also if you get the other right doesn't sort of cover this too?
The Right to Reconfigure the Input Device.
Examples please. Most the games under this category that I can think of are OLD.
The Right Not To Be Insulted.
Ok for the situation they give this is somewhat understandable. When a game is insulting for no reason it is pointless and rude and often can remove fun factor. There are games particularly RPGs where the attitude from NPCs is a nice touch and somewhat necessary to have a good game flow.
Seriously, this seems like a lot of griping, missing a lot of examples. Maybe if there was some more substance to some of the reasons with valid examples then this wouldn't sound so much like some 12 yr old whining about losing too many games of Mario because they couldn't save, or didn't know to hold up after Bowser fell at the end of Mario 3.
Better yet, just load the whole program to memory. And every other program while you are at it. I mean sure it might take 10 minutes to boot, but then every program will be open and ready for you, and you'll never have to wait for anything.
DLPs - Still have the rainbow effect issue with the color wheel, unless you really want to blow the money for a three chip dlp, if they are even out of projectors yet. And I have a big problem with moving parts, too easy to break.
LCDs - Still WAY TOO expensive in comparison to Plasma of equal size.
LCoS - Isn't this the technology that was forgotten before we heard about it.
OLED - I've heard this will be off the ground many times, the problem is it will be more expensive then LCD when it comes out, because it will be NEW.
Plasma - High Heat (some LCoS sets of present day and definitely CRT sets have this same problem), Burn-In Prone (Overstated problem, exists in CRTs as well, and the equal annoying LCD Ghosting problem even if it isn't permanent), Short Life (drop the half we aren't talking radioactive elements here, they share nearly the same operating life of most LCDs at 60k hrs, and LCDs do wear besides just the backlight going out).
Wow I love how grossly uninformed some of our contestants on this board our today. Join us for another fun episode of teach the doofus to research before he posts.
Problem 2:
The circuit courts have put an undue burden on examiners with the requirement for motivation when combining obvious references. This ignores the relevant skill in the art. The problem isn't the patent office in that case, it is an unfounded standard not in the law that the supreme court in the '60s ruled unnecessary. There is a case testing this, but the USSC may not hear it.
Trademarks work differently, and if my understanding is right different fields can have multiple names trademarked, don't forget images usually fall into this too.
The problem with obviousness comes with the idea of motivation. As a patent examiner I can attest that the hardest problem combining two or more references together is the need for a motivation. A need that judgements handed down by the Supreme Court in the 1960s did not require, but the circuit court decided were important. This is actually an issue that a company is trying to get in front of the Supreme Court and they actually have support from, the evil Microsoft. This is something you should all want, for without the need for a motivation it would be 10 times easier to make obviousness rejections under 35 USC 103. Also I recommmend some of you read the MPEP, which I am pretty sure is on the uspto site, and then complain that we cannot do our job. If any of you read that and feel like you can do the job, apply already and shuddup. If I could remember the name of that case I would tell you, but your courts have actually made our job harder. Also remember if you know of prior art for an existing patent bring it to the attention of those who would be interested (ie companies in the same field). Re-examination do happen and we can always take away an issued patent.
All I can say is to hell with that. I work at the patent office. We all have a minimum BS in our field, and to be quite honest we do not simply rubberstamp anything. You realize that if anyone thinks a case is allowed on first action they have to consult like 5 different people, do more searching and most cannot get anyone to sign off on the work until it has been beaten to death for nearly weeks. Quota or not we reject, reject, reject. The quota isn't for patents issued, first rejections and abandoments or RCE (request for continued examination), along with some other things also count towards quota. So before you express to know what goes on at the patent office, go do it, and if you did and left cause you didn't like it, don't complain that the rest of us don't do our damn job, cause we do.
You hit that one, girl gamers like interactivity and socialization. The ones who like it for real play MMOs or Diablo II or other games that basically force people to go online and be interactive, most female gamers I know play WoW or D2. Those who do not mind "fake" socialization enjoy the sims. Personally I hate the sims with a passion, but for some reason it is one of the few universal games.
When looking at an issued patent for the purpose of prior art, ignore the claims. Now remember that in the patent world the claims are what really matter for the sake of analyzing a present invention, so by and large ignore the specification and details of the current application by Apple. Since it is practice to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the claims when searching for prior art, you sometimes make connections that most people miss. Btw, IANAL but IAAPE (I am a patent examiner). General Statement: there are provisions in the law to allow re-examination of issued patents, so stop complaining about prior art and submit it to the Patent Office, you can always find a lawyer somewhere and I would be seriously surprised if there are not groups willing to spend the money to fight if you point it out to them as well (ie the companies the patent will affect).
Ok, so I didn't RTFA and to be honest I have no intention to. If he is claiming Star Trek sucked to begin with it is obviously must be because it is succesful. I mean heaven for bid anything sci-fi become "popular". The only other franchise in the genre to make loads of money, and probably make the most money, is Star Wars.
Sure more Sci-Fi is available now, but I watch the sci-fi channel and read novels. Is it really that much better then it was 10, 20 or 30 yrs ago? Nope. There are still a lot of "B" movies in the sci-fi world, and a lot of "A" movies that should never have been made.
I watched Firefly. It was Ok. But like most sci-fi shows it is over-hyped by its fanboys (and girls). Was it time for Star Trek to die? Yes. Was it because it sucked from the start? No. The franchise was merely over-exposed. The last two TNG films were only so-so at best and horrific at worst. The last series only even started to get remotely good this season. It did not always suck, TNG and DS9 were VERY good series and fierce arguments can be had as to which is the better. TOS is somewhat campy, but it is nearly 40 yr old sci-fi.
I just think it is hilarious we are getting this information from a novelist. Not an author, or a literary legend but a novelist. The sad thing isn't TV and/or movie sci-fi. I think it is sadder we have a series of authors (ie Card, Crichton, Clancy, Grisham) who produce books to sell en masse to make money. There is a joke in Family Guy about Stephen King doing this. Forget if the book is good, we'll get it out with name recognition then force feed a crappy movie to the public.
I honestly think I'd appreciate Card going after the total absence of GREAT work in the literary field then going into movies and tv shows where he really has no clue what he is talking about. Yes it is sci-fi, but I still would rather here someone else complain about sci-fi and Star Trek.
The reality is so long as studios make sci-fi and fantasy movies that are good, the availability of sci-fi to the masses (and particularly to the geeks will be good). I mean the Lord of the Rings movies got tons of people, myself included, to read the original books. I actually think I've read more because of movies. I mean I would never have understood 2001 without reading it. My DVD collection is full of good and bad sci-fi, but I enjoy it all (sometimes because it is campy). So now that I have gone way off topic I will just stop here and reflect...
The problem is this is being pushed as a religious idea and nothing more. There are a group of people who believe in ID AND believe that Aliens are responsible. The problem is they are not the ones pushing this idea, with no scientific backing, into schools. They are trying to teach ID as a THEORY. But it has FAILED the scientific process. These people PANIC because they feel the THEORY of EVOLUTION is being taught as FACT. So long as teachers are doing their job RIGHT (which is rare in public school), EVOLUTION is being taught as a TESTED THEORY, that has SCIENTIFIC backing.
I am sure someone else would have mentioned this, but there is an episode of Penn and Teller's Bullshit on this that while obviously spending its time attacking ID'ers shows that most (if not all of them) are nothing more then religious fundamentalist. BTW, if you believe in creationism great. But I would recommend Index to Creationist Claims
Get into something you enjoy. Yes this will sound blatantly redundant but this is the best advice anyone could possibly give you. I started school at Ohio State for ECE and finished with the exact same. I was one of the lucky few who got it right the first time.
I am about to start work in a few works for a somewhat related job at the Patent Office, examining patents. Is it the ideal job? Probably not, but it is a chance that I think I will enjoy and I get to move from one big city to an even bigger metro-area, which I enjoy.
In the long run, I would choose a list of companies you would like to work for. If you are going into IT that is just about anyone. Let me say, if you are going into IT as a "support" role, you'd better be a people person. If you are doing a CS degree to actually program, find out what companies you'd like working for and then try to find employees who can talk to you about the experience.
You can do the same with hardware companies. Evaluate all possibilities and decide what is best for you. I know that I would still like to work for AMD, Intel, or IBM someday doing VLSI circuit design. For the mean time, I will enjoy my job at the Patent Office and who knows maybe it will lead into something else. (I have considered patent law in the past)
So if you have a dream shoot for it. Don't allow this market availability and money draw you away from something you really want to do. You should be happy with your job and your life because they say "money cannot buy happiness." I tend to agree on that one.
DVD-5 discs can be had for about $0.50 a piece if you are fortunate enough to have a Microcenter nearby. If not they probably sail them nearly as cheap online.
DVD-9 are now down to about $7 a piece on newegg. Yes they are still expensive but it is still a fairly niche market.
To address the dual-layer burner issue. Many burners have out Firmware updates to make them dual layer. I am not sure if any of the makers sanctioned the updates but there are definitely some hacked firmwares if nothing else.
They are pushing this because TV is one of the few things not keeping up with the digital trend. There are many advantages to things going digital. If there weren't we'd still all be using record players, VCRs and cell phones would still be a very niche market. TVs are due to catch up and in reality people would have been buying into this all the long has it been better advertised. I think this was grossly underpushed and is why things are in danger of getting delayed. I personally will have a HDTV soon so I could care less either way.
Okay people, calm down. We are only talking about Over-The-Air broadcasts here. Which I think some of you have forgotten. From the article, 85% of Americans get their TV from Cable or Satellite. That means only 15% are going to be shit out of luck. To be honest, things should just switch off on Jan 1, 2006 and cut all analog broadcasts. It would be nice to see the government quasi-encouraging technology for a change instead of stifling it.
You obviously haven't USED Outlook. Eudora is light years behind it. Eudora is closer to Outlook Express, that crappy free thing they give away to you. The only program I have used an liked outside of Outlook is Evolution which is what I tend to use in Linux.
Try really digging into Outlook and compare it to Eudora. The interface is a lot cleaner and more refined (especially in Outlooks 2003). The organization capabilities far outway Eudora. Calendar, Tasks, Notes, they all work great and if you have a Windows based PDA you HAVE to use outlook just for all the stuff you lose otherwise. As a PIM it is excellent. Eudora is far from being a true PIM since it has minimal if any real compatibility with either Palm or Outlook.
If you ask the true die hards though which program is the most powerful they'll tell you it is Lotus Notes. Having used Outlook/Exchange, GroupWise, and Lotus in business settings I will state that Lotus is the most powerful probably but it seems to diverge a bit from the norms setup by Outlook and GroupWise (that evil program from Novell).
I haven't used Eudora in ages, so feel free to enlighten me if they have actually added useable Rules, Spam Filtering, and cleaned up what was one of the worlds ugliest interfaces for a long while.
Slashdot Mirror
Like I said, he paid no attention to the claims, and actually the argument states the claims are pointless because they are impossible. But can the claims be used as stated if the data is of a non-random format. If the claims themselves reflect truly impossible claims then instead of bitching about it on a website, they should write a nice long letter explaining the impossibility of the claims (not the spec), to the appropriate individuals at the patent office. I point out for the thousandth time on slashdot that there is a re-exam process where the patentability of a claim can be re-checked. Too many people complain about the patent system, but too few of you do anything about it.
Well even if effected might be proper, and I would have to re-read to be sure. I am still pretty sure affect as used is improper though since it is being used as a noun.
The problem with your reference site is too much emphasis on the spec and not enough on the claims. The claims seem to avoid that area of random data, since it isn't mentioned in the claims he shows. Remember, claims not spec. If I disclose my invention in the spec, the rest of it could go off on a total tangent, though usually the "tangent" gets editted out before publishing.
For effect we are going to analyze the broadest claim the way it should be analyzed. Get out your notebooks cause you'll want to understand this before you complain about another patent.
1. A method of operating a video game including a game character controlled by a player, the method comprising:
This "preamble" tells us we are dealing with a mode of operating a video game. It further says that there is a game character and that said game character is player controlled. Straight forward so far, but we have limited ourself to the realms of video games and the user controlled characters there-in.
(a) setting a sanity level of the game character;
We are now assigning a sanity level to the game character that was mentioned before. This means that some sort of value for sanity is being set, this is somewhat similar to what would be done for health, mana, or the like; however, it is important to note at the same time that it IS DIFFERENT.
(b) modifying the sanity level of the game, character during game play according to occurrences in the game, wherein a modifying amount of is determined based on a charater reaction and an amount of character preparation;
We are now changing the sanity level for the character during game play, this limits the setting to occuring while the game is actually being played. Now there are two things that determine the modification amount: (1) characters reaction and (2) amount of character preparation.
This is now two more limitations that must be met in any prior art (including possible multiple references for 35 USC 103(a) obviousness).
(c) controlling game play according to the sanity level of the game character, game play being controlled at least by varying game effects according to the game charater sanity level
Now the game is affected by the sanity level of the mentioned game character. Now it states that at the very least game effects will be varied according to the game character's sanity level. This means that some degree of changes in some characters of game play will be changed based on this level.
Now to defend this over mentioned prior art, Nethack people keep mentioning the hallucination potion. This has 0 to do with the patent if that is true. The system used for Nethack could simply have stated, if potion=TRUE then change the effects. This is therefore different then the current patent, unless someone can show otherwise that the system as claimed above is EXACTLY how Nethack was done.
This similar thing goes for other games. If they used different methods then it would not preclude the patenability of this patent. Remember prior art needs to be before the filing date on this application, also remember that if the system used in other games is unknown, and unpublished the individual companies would have to make aware that they invented such a system to preclude patentability and get the patent nulled.
Remember what is in the claim is what the patent is for and do not confuse the spec for what the patent is good for. The specification is put there so the public knows the "Best Mode" for the invention. Any questions, please feel free to ask.
Its not patenting anything naturally occurring. RTFP (read the full patent), it clearly is a method/system for controlling a video game.
He is correct the uses are not proper. Remember AFFECT is the verb. EFFECT is the noun. Therefore EFFECTED should never be an appropriate word, it would be AFFECTED. And the use of AFFECT is as a verb so it would be EFFECT. Your own definitions there told you that.
The Spec means nothing. The considerably broader claims are what is actually covered by the patent. That spec could read on several embodiments of the same system and in the end only one of those embodiments may be specifically covered by this patent, or the claims could be so broad to cover then all. However, their coverage is not limited to these embodiments, so any other system that reads along the claims could still be infringing the patent. As I have said tons of times, please read patent law and procedure of the United States. There are many things that you (the Slashdot community) really DO NOT KNOW or UNDERSTAND.
The Right to Play.
Non-interactive elements? I haven't played many games where cut-scenes overrun the game. Anyone have some good examples of this...
The Right to Win.
Here is something else I haven't seen, is an impossible to win game. I am sure they exist somewhere, the game the developer screwed up so you couldn't beat, or intentially made that way...
The Right to Instructions.
Yes everyone has a right to know how to play. This is another one of those where I fail to have much of an example.
The Right to Feedback.
Ok this almost goes against the way many games work based on their example. I mean if every game kept giving you feedback then what would be the fun of learning? Seriously, if RTS or RPGs gave too much feedback everyone would win them all the time, and there is something to be said for those people who actually PLAYED the game.
The Right To Motivation.
Sometimes the game isn't suppose to tell you what to do. I don't see many games without motivations, the motivations may be obscure but they usually exist.
The Right to Make Decisions.
This really depends on how far you want to take the idea of decisions. Both KotoR I and II give you plenty of chances to make decisions that effect the game. Actually most RPGs allow for this to some extent, even to the point of near total independence (Morrowind). But some degree of control is needed in some games, and the way some FPS and RTS are set up there need to be minimal decision making beyond standard gameplay decisions. BTW, are there seriously people who don't know what Whack-a-mole is?
The Right to a Swift Death.
Now I cannot be certain with respect to all games, but by and large this mostly applies to RPGs I would believe. Most mission based games let you know of failure pretty immediately and some RPGs let you know if you made a no-no (Morrowind again) so you could go back. I do not believe death is really a necessity hear, but some sort of a message saying OOPs would work.
The Right To Control Cut-Scenes.
Ok this one I can kind of see. There are too few games that let you rewatch cut-scenes at will and pausing would be nice for when that pesky phone rings. Truly what I want from cut scenes are Dark Forces 2: Jedi Knight cut-scenes. Live acting how I miss thee. It added a different dimension and flavor to the cut-scenes and games and is something that should be considered eventhough it is probably a cost issue.
The Right to Quit, Pause, Save and Resume the Game.
No No No. Games need to be a bit hard. What challenge is there if i can hit save every two seconds. Besides this is only a problem in some games and probably overstated here. By saving whenever and wherever you have the situation that everyone gets into in playing on emulators where you save-state every two seconds and do things perfectly without fail. I mean isn't this how the 8 minute (or however long) Mario 3 was done.
The Right to Choose Not to Save the Game.
Can someone give me an example of this. Everygame I think of with auto-saves has an auto-save slot and you can still have your own save slots. Also, a bit of whining tying this back into a previous "right". I do not see the problem they do with this. Also if you get the other right doesn't sort of cover this too?
The Right to Reconfigure the Input Device.
Examples please. Most the games under this category that I can think of are OLD.
The Right Not To Be Insulted.
Ok for the situation they give this is somewhat understandable. When a game is insulting for no reason it is pointless and rude and often can remove fun factor. There are games particularly RPGs where the attitude from NPCs is a nice touch and somewhat necessary to have a good game flow.
Seriously, this seems like a lot of griping, missing a lot of examples. Maybe if there was some more substance to some of the reasons with valid examples then this wouldn't sound so much like some 12 yr old whining about losing too many games of Mario because they couldn't save, or didn't know to hold up after Bowser fell at the end of Mario 3.
Better yet, just load the whole program to memory. And every other program while you are at it. I mean sure it might take 10 minutes to boot, but then every program will be open and ready for you, and you'll never have to wait for anything.
DLPs - Still have the rainbow effect issue with the color wheel, unless you really want to blow the money for a three chip dlp, if they are even out of projectors yet. And I have a big problem with moving parts, too easy to break.
LCDs - Still WAY TOO expensive in comparison to Plasma of equal size.
LCoS - Isn't this the technology that was forgotten before we heard about it.
OLED - I've heard this will be off the ground many times, the problem is it will be more expensive then LCD when it comes out, because it will be NEW.
Plasma - High Heat (some LCoS sets of present day and definitely CRT sets have this same problem), Burn-In Prone (Overstated problem, exists in CRTs as well, and the equal annoying LCD Ghosting problem even if it isn't permanent), Short Life (drop the half we aren't talking radioactive elements here, they share nearly the same operating life of most LCDs at 60k hrs, and LCDs do wear besides just the backlight going out).
Wow I love how grossly uninformed some of our contestants on this board our today. Join us for another fun episode of teach the doofus to research before he posts.
Problem 1:
In hindsight everything looks obvious.
Problem 2:
The circuit courts have put an undue burden on examiners with the requirement for motivation when combining obvious references. This ignores the relevant skill in the art. The problem isn't the patent office in that case, it is an unfounded standard not in the law that the supreme court in the '60s ruled unnecessary. There is a case testing this, but the USSC may not hear it.
Trademarks work differently, and if my understanding is right different fields can have multiple names trademarked, don't forget images usually fall into this too.
The problem with obviousness comes with the idea of motivation. As a patent examiner I can attest that the hardest problem combining two or more references together is the need for a motivation. A need that judgements handed down by the Supreme Court in the 1960s did not require, but the circuit court decided were important. This is actually an issue that a company is trying to get in front of the Supreme Court and they actually have support from, the evil Microsoft. This is something you should all want, for without the need for a motivation it would be 10 times easier to make obviousness rejections under 35 USC 103. Also I recommmend some of you read the MPEP, which I am pretty sure is on the uspto site, and then complain that we cannot do our job. If any of you read that and feel like you can do the job, apply already and shuddup. If I could remember the name of that case I would tell you, but your courts have actually made our job harder. Also remember if you know of prior art for an existing patent bring it to the attention of those who would be interested (ie companies in the same field). Re-examination do happen and we can always take away an issued patent.
All I can say is to hell with that. I work at the patent office. We all have a minimum BS in our field, and to be quite honest we do not simply rubberstamp anything. You realize that if anyone thinks a case is allowed on first action they have to consult like 5 different people, do more searching and most cannot get anyone to sign off on the work until it has been beaten to death for nearly weeks. Quota or not we reject, reject, reject. The quota isn't for patents issued, first rejections and abandoments or RCE (request for continued examination), along with some other things also count towards quota. So before you express to know what goes on at the patent office, go do it, and if you did and left cause you didn't like it, don't complain that the rest of us don't do our damn job, cause we do.
You hit that one, girl gamers like interactivity and socialization. The ones who like it for real play MMOs or Diablo II or other games that basically force people to go online and be interactive, most female gamers I know play WoW or D2. Those who do not mind "fake" socialization enjoy the sims. Personally I hate the sims with a passion, but for some reason it is one of the few universal games.
When looking at an issued patent for the purpose of prior art, ignore the claims. Now remember that in the patent world the claims are what really matter for the sake of analyzing a present invention, so by and large ignore the specification and details of the current application by Apple. Since it is practice to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the claims when searching for prior art, you sometimes make connections that most people miss. Btw, IANAL but IAAPE (I am a patent examiner). General Statement: there are provisions in the law to allow re-examination of issued patents, so stop complaining about prior art and submit it to the Patent Office, you can always find a lawyer somewhere and I would be seriously surprised if there are not groups willing to spend the money to fight if you point it out to them as well (ie the companies the patent will affect).
$150 + (4x$90) = $510 for 4 GB of solid state storage. Definitely not worth it.
Ok, so I didn't RTFA and to be honest I have no intention to. If he is claiming Star Trek sucked to begin with it is obviously must be because it is succesful. I mean heaven for bid anything sci-fi become "popular". The only other franchise in the genre to make loads of money, and probably make the most money, is Star Wars.
Sure more Sci-Fi is available now, but I watch the sci-fi channel and read novels. Is it really that much better then it was 10, 20 or 30 yrs ago? Nope. There are still a lot of "B" movies in the sci-fi world, and a lot of "A" movies that should never have been made.
I watched Firefly. It was Ok. But like most sci-fi shows it is over-hyped by its fanboys (and girls). Was it time for Star Trek to die? Yes. Was it because it sucked from the start? No. The franchise was merely over-exposed. The last two TNG films were only so-so at best and horrific at worst. The last series only even started to get remotely good this season. It did not always suck, TNG and DS9 were VERY good series and fierce arguments can be had as to which is the better. TOS is somewhat campy, but it is nearly 40 yr old sci-fi.
I just think it is hilarious we are getting this information from a novelist. Not an author, or a literary legend but a novelist. The sad thing isn't TV and/or movie sci-fi. I think it is sadder we have a series of authors (ie Card, Crichton, Clancy, Grisham) who produce books to sell en masse to make money. There is a joke in Family Guy about Stephen King doing this. Forget if the book is good, we'll get it out with name recognition then force feed a crappy movie to the public.
I honestly think I'd appreciate Card going after the total absence of GREAT work in the literary field then going into movies and tv shows where he really has no clue what he is talking about. Yes it is sci-fi, but I still would rather here someone else complain about sci-fi and Star Trek.
The reality is so long as studios make sci-fi and fantasy movies that are good, the availability of sci-fi to the masses (and particularly to the geeks will be good). I mean the Lord of the Rings movies got tons of people, myself included, to read the original books. I actually think I've read more because of movies. I mean I would never have understood 2001 without reading it. My DVD collection is full of good and bad sci-fi, but I enjoy it all (sometimes because it is campy). So now that I have gone way off topic I will just stop here and reflect...
The problem is this is being pushed as a religious idea and nothing more. There are a group of people who believe in ID AND believe that Aliens are responsible. The problem is they are not the ones pushing this idea, with no scientific backing, into schools. They are trying to teach ID as a THEORY. But it has FAILED the scientific process. These people PANIC because they feel the THEORY of EVOLUTION is being taught as FACT. So long as teachers are doing their job RIGHT (which is rare in public school), EVOLUTION is being taught as a TESTED THEORY, that has SCIENTIFIC backing.
I am sure someone else would have mentioned this, but there is an episode of Penn and Teller's Bullshit on this that while obviously spending its time attacking ID'ers shows that most (if not all of them) are nothing more then religious fundamentalist. BTW, if you believe in creationism great. But I would recommend Index to Creationist Claims
Get into something you enjoy. Yes this will sound blatantly redundant but this is the best advice anyone could possibly give you. I started school at Ohio State for ECE and finished with the exact same. I was one of the lucky few who got it right the first time.
I am about to start work in a few works for a somewhat related job at the Patent Office, examining patents. Is it the ideal job? Probably not, but it is a chance that I think I will enjoy and I get to move from one big city to an even bigger metro-area, which I enjoy.
In the long run, I would choose a list of companies you would like to work for. If you are going into IT that is just about anyone. Let me say, if you are going into IT as a "support" role, you'd better be a people person. If you are doing a CS degree to actually program, find out what companies you'd like working for and then try to find employees who can talk to you about the experience.
You can do the same with hardware companies. Evaluate all possibilities and decide what is best for you. I know that I would still like to work for AMD, Intel, or IBM someday doing VLSI circuit design. For the mean time, I will enjoy my job at the Patent Office and who knows maybe it will lead into something else. (I have considered patent law in the past)
So if you have a dream shoot for it. Don't allow this market availability and money draw you away from something you really want to do. You should be happy with your job and your life because they say "money cannot buy happiness." I tend to agree on that one.
Skip right to the retinal scanner.
DVD-5 discs can be had for about $0.50 a piece if you are fortunate enough to have a Microcenter nearby. If not they probably sail them nearly as cheap online.
DVD-9 are now down to about $7 a piece on newegg. Yes they are still expensive but it is still a fairly niche market.
To address the dual-layer burner issue. Many burners have out Firmware updates to make them dual layer. I am not sure if any of the makers sanctioned the updates but there are definitely some hacked firmwares if nothing else.
They are pushing this because TV is one of the few things not keeping up with the digital trend. There are many advantages to things going digital. If there weren't we'd still all be using record players, VCRs and cell phones would still be a very niche market. TVs are due to catch up and in reality people would have been buying into this all the long has it been better advertised. I think this was grossly underpushed and is why things are in danger of getting delayed. I personally will have a HDTV soon so I could care less either way.
Okay people, calm down. We are only talking about Over-The-Air broadcasts here. Which I think some of you have forgotten. From the article, 85% of Americans get their TV from Cable or Satellite. That means only 15% are going to be shit out of luck. To be honest, things should just switch off on Jan 1, 2006 and cut all analog broadcasts. It would be nice to see the government quasi-encouraging technology for a change instead of stifling it.
You obviously haven't USED Outlook. Eudora is light years behind it. Eudora is closer to Outlook Express, that crappy free thing they give away to you. The only program I have used an liked outside of Outlook is Evolution which is what I tend to use in Linux.
Try really digging into Outlook and compare it to Eudora. The interface is a lot cleaner and more refined (especially in Outlooks 2003). The organization capabilities far outway Eudora. Calendar, Tasks, Notes, they all work great and if you have a Windows based PDA you HAVE to use outlook just for all the stuff you lose otherwise. As a PIM it is excellent. Eudora is far from being a true PIM since it has minimal if any real compatibility with either Palm or Outlook.
If you ask the true die hards though which program is the most powerful they'll tell you it is Lotus Notes. Having used Outlook/Exchange, GroupWise, and Lotus in business settings I will state that Lotus is the most powerful probably but it seems to diverge a bit from the norms setup by Outlook and GroupWise (that evil program from Novell).
I haven't used Eudora in ages, so feel free to enlighten me if they have actually added useable Rules, Spam Filtering, and cleaned up what was one of the worlds ugliest interfaces for a long while.