Thanks, this explains you comment about counting angels dancing on the head of a pin.
I suppose the EPO employees would have only a vested interest, not a conflict of interest, if they have convinced themselves that patents are a splendid idea for everybody.
Is this the actual text? So as such is not even written there?
Most likely the people working for EPO have convinced themselves that patents are a good thing Therefore it's hardly unexpected that they are going to be in favour of making patents easier to get in as many fields as possible.
Since they make money from the patent system, they have a conflict of interest when giving advice about possible changes to the system. They should restrict themselves to factual information about the workings of the present system.
I would have thought most people in this situation would have exchanged their US driver's licences for a British one (is the US one of the countries for which this can be done automatically?) You should then have no difficulty using the British licence during trips to the US.
You shouldn't expect to be paying taxes in a territory where you are neither resident nor have investment income.
My problem? I just want to be able to use search engines, even when I am in France.
Perhaps as a laywer you can give some insight about why Google needs to care at all about French law and French court judgements? Provided it doesn't operate any office or facilities in France. Internet users in France can connect to its servers in other countries. Then everybody (except perhaps the French trademark holders and laywers) is happy.
This is interesting. But in this case, is it reasonable to hold Google responsible for this violation of French law? Google provides an automated system where others can pay to have ads attached to particular search results. I would have expected whoever commissioned the ad to be responsible in this case and not Google.
I am not sure what the consequences of this decision will be for Google. Must they now maintain a list of every trademark registered in France (I suppose there will be millions) and apply personal judgement on whether a particular advertisement would be acceptable? This would completely destroy their business model, and without a business model, why bother to provide a search engine to the French?
When you say "we don't care", who are you speaking for exactly? The average Internet user in France, or French lawyers?
Tighten the ring a bit so that it constricts the blood circulation so that the finger eventually falls off. If your wife is reasonable she won't force you to wear it after that.
This technique also works well with neck ties if your boss demands that you wear one.
And on top of this, copyright law doesn't give any true opt out. Saying "I place this work in the public domain" doesn't necessarily have any legal meaning, especially outside the USA.
I agree with the dislike for paperwork. But like the appeal says, the opt-out just moves the burden of paperwork to the people who want to make use of the materials. How are you supposed to determine if something is still under copyright, if it has no date, the publisher is out of business and you have no idea if and when the author died?
Government itself is not part of the "capitalist economy", it forms a separate socialist economy which does interact with the capitalist economy in various ways.
Truely I think open source enthusiasts should stay clear of it. While it may seem attractive to take funding from this source in the short term, you will pay the price of accepting bureaucracy and politics and in the end it will kill you... if you are lucky.
This isn't important: I never heard of anyone who was "locked in" to a particular OS because they couldn't figure out how to convert their text files.
But more generally a text file is just a file consisting of characters in some character set. It's quite possible that such a file can only be understood by a proprietary software system, e.g. proprietary programming languages with no free implementations have existed.
Bureaucratic rules such as these are typically worthless in practice.
I have the impression, from outside the US, that much of the research efforts of the country are now dedicated to the military and other government purposes. If this is the case, it's not correct to say that the US is no longer technologically advanced, simply that it's pursuing a different direction towards dominance. However I consider this to be a somewhat old-fashioned and discredited direction, since maintaining empires became practically impossible in the 20th century and there is no evidence so far that the 21th century is any different.
I wouldn't trust Windows with a live Internet connection. In the time that you are connected to submit the tax, the machine would have been infected with 12 different keyloggers and the tax details sent to Nigeria, Bulgaria and Kazakhstan.
It's copyright that's the problem, not copyright violation. The only social solutions that may work would involve mass brainwashing or construction of a police state and ubiquitous surveillance.
Really? The HTML version is completely non-functional on my system (generic Firefox 1.0 on generic Linux). Are you saying that the web site is correct, and SuSE 9.2 has a patched version of Firefox or something?
They have discovered that computer networks make copyright law obsolete, for many purposes, and are trying a technical approach instead. This is inevitable, really.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks, this explains you comment about counting angels dancing on the head of a pin.
I suppose the EPO employees would have only a vested interest, not a conflict of interest, if they have convinced themselves that patents are a splendid idea for everybody.
Is this the actual text? So as such is not even written there?
Most likely the people working for EPO have convinced themselves that patents are a good thing Therefore it's hardly unexpected that they are going to be in favour of making patents easier to get in as many fields as possible.
Since they make money from the patent system, they have a conflict of interest when giving advice about possible changes to the system. They should restrict themselves to factual information about the workings of the present system.
If Slashdot tried to move to the Netherlands today, it would be booted out within 24 hours.
I would have thought most people in this situation would have exchanged their US driver's licences for a British one (is the US one of the countries for which this can be done automatically?) You should then have no difficulty using the British licence during trips to the US.
You shouldn't expect to be paying taxes in a territory where you are neither resident nor have investment income.
My problem? I just want to be able to use search engines, even when I am in France.
Perhaps as a laywer you can give some insight about why Google needs to care at all about French law and French court judgements? Provided it doesn't operate any office or facilities in France. Internet users in France can connect to its servers in other countries. Then everybody (except perhaps the French trademark holders and laywers) is happy.
This is interesting. But in this case, is it reasonable to hold Google responsible for this violation of French law? Google provides an automated system where others can pay to have ads attached to particular search results. I would have expected whoever commissioned the ad to be responsible in this case and not Google.
I am not sure what the consequences of this decision will be for Google. Must they now maintain a list of every trademark registered in France (I suppose there will be millions) and apply personal judgement on whether a particular advertisement would be acceptable? This would completely destroy their business model, and without a business model, why bother to provide a search engine to the French?
When you say "we don't care", who are you speaking for exactly? The average Internet user in France, or French lawyers?
Tighten the ring a bit so that it constricts the blood circulation so that the finger eventually falls off. If your wife is reasonable she won't force you to wear it after that.
This technique also works well with neck ties if your boss demands that you wear one.
The idea of embracing or extending a MS format makes me feel ill. I'd rather embrace and extend complete gibberish. But wait, it's the same thing.
Thanks, I was a complete mystery to me why they thought releasing the documents in a Windows-only format constituted opening them up to "everybody".
This would be true, except K means Kelvin and not kilo, and computer science was traditionally out of line in its use of the SI system.
And on top of this, copyright law doesn't give any true opt out. Saying "I place this work in the public domain" doesn't necessarily have any legal meaning, especially outside the USA.
I agree with the dislike for paperwork. But like the appeal says, the opt-out just moves the burden of paperwork to the people who want to make use of the materials. How are you supposed to determine if something is still under copyright, if it has no date, the publisher is out of business and you have no idea if and when the author died?
Government itself is not part of the "capitalist economy", it forms a separate socialist economy which does interact with the capitalist economy in various ways.
... if you are lucky.
Truely I think open source enthusiasts should stay clear of it. While it may seem attractive to take funding from this source in the short term, you will pay the price of accepting bureaucracy and politics and in the end it will kill you
This isn't important: I never heard of anyone who was "locked in" to a particular OS because they couldn't figure out how to convert their text files.
But more generally a text file is just a file consisting of characters in some character set. It's quite possible that such a file can only be understood by a proprietary software system, e.g. proprietary programming languages with no free implementations have existed.
Bureaucratic rules such as these are typically worthless in practice.
Credit card.
Yes, it's pretty bad, considering most of this stuff is manufactured in East Asia, not the USA. The problem is most likely in Europe I think.
If it hadn't been for this mistake, it wouldn't be possible to search for googol, the number, anymore. It would be lost in the noise.
Not every registrar allows setting REGISTRAR-LOCK arbitrarily. E.g. gandi.fr, the registrar of gnu.org, does not.
I have the impression, from outside the US, that much of the research efforts of the country are now dedicated to the military and other government purposes. If this is the case, it's not correct to say that the US is no longer technologically advanced, simply that it's pursuing a different direction towards dominance. However I consider this to be a somewhat old-fashioned and discredited direction, since maintaining empires became practically impossible in the 20th century and there is no evidence so far that the 21th century is any different.
I wouldn't trust Windows with a live Internet connection. In the time that you are connected to submit the tax, the machine would have been infected with 12 different keyloggers and the tax details sent to Nigeria, Bulgaria and Kazakhstan.
It's copyright that's the problem, not copyright violation. The only social solutions that may work would involve mass brainwashing or construction of a police state and ubiquitous surveillance.
I have a feeling the queen is above the law and couldn't be prosecuted for this sort of thing.
At least they gave it to a game developer and not a game player.
Really? The HTML version is completely non-functional on my system (generic Firefox 1.0 on generic Linux). Are you saying that the web site is correct, and SuSE 9.2 has a patched version of Firefox or something?
They have discovered that computer networks make copyright law obsolete, for many purposes, and are trying a technical approach instead. This is inevitable, really.