I daresay that transmission completion in less than "real time" doesn't seem to be addressed in the claims (skimmed), but might or might not be a side-effect of compression (which they do repeatedly mention).
IANAL too.
I surely do hope that BBSes and pkzip count as prior art to throw out this patent...
If you invent something really cool, you should have a shot at making money off of it.
But--everybody else wants to use your really cool invention, too.
In the interests of fairness to you and to everybody else, the patent was created.
This line of thinking completely falls apart when you consider:
Trade secrets (e.g. food/drink formulas)
Life isn't fair, why should inventors bother sharing when they don't need to share?
Patents were created to combat trade secrets; the money (iff licensed) is a side-effect.
You're comparing putting up wallpaper (something purely decorative) with building cars/planes/microprocessors?
"If you want something done right, better do it yourself" doesn't apply to everything, but it does tend to apply to incremental improvements that depend on artistic creativity.
One of the things I'd like to see change (besides like having patents treated a bit more like trademarks) is how patents are viewed. I'd rather see them being viewed more like copyright is: get instant coverage once the 'invention' is created, file a description to the PTO, it gets filed - without any needed approval - and conduct your business. Then when an infrigment claim comes in, it gets evaluated by the PTO before any lawsuits are allowed to go forth.
No, that wouldn't clear up the backlog, since I'm sure there would be a flurry of infrigment claims that would need to be processed, but it might help delay the cost of defending an infringment suit to after it's determined to be truely valid, rather than most probably getting sued out of existance trying to defend it, even though the case has no real merit.
Could you explain this "instant coverage" concept? And would it involve spending time comparable to Usenet?
At least with the current system there's somewhat of a filter in place for us mortals (even if it is only 5% after some number of revisions on each application).
Where did I say that this was deserving of a patent? The part you chopped off, my wish that QLaunch was older, should've been adequate to express my disagreement.
My main thrust was that any "methods" that an end-user is expected to perform should not be patentable, regardless of the estimation of novelty.
One of the goals to copyrights and patents is to prevent authors from keeping things [a trade] secret.
Have you evaluated the patent with that mindset?
What if they'd kept it a secret to themselves (unpublished)?
What if they'd just published it but didn't explain how they did it (via neither code [copyright] nor method [patent])?
While single-clicking and double-clicking are common now, it's the double-clicking and long-time clicking on a PDA that's somewhat novel. (and I wish that QLaunch was older).
When I write the downstroke, it autocompletes with a company starting with L.
I write, and yes the "l" does appear, but when I cross-stroke to make it a "t" it does exactly what I'd expect and erases the "l" replacing it with a proper "t".
Some instructions were evidently left out, as you are getting "l" rather than a company name. Requirements:
An address entry with a company name starting with "L" - for extra fun, make it long enough to occupy more than one line
An address entry with a company name starting with "T" (optional?)
An address entry with a company name starting with "I" (optional?)
Perform the Graffiti 2 entry (downstroke followed by cross-stroke) in a new address entry in (obviously) the Company field.
I just now tried it and it happens for me too; Contacts 1.0.1 on OS 5.2.1. I'll bet you'll have an epiphany if you bother to try it again; even though this is a relatively oldish story, I hope you'll post results.
As a sidenote, I have abandoned Graffiti almost entirely (except for menu stroke via Graffiti-anywhere on T3) and instead use MessagEaseST regularly.
Regarding identity "theft": if you were to masquerade as someone else in a closed system then yes, this wouldn't be harmful. For example, if I told a bunch of people at a bar that my name was Clint Eastwood, it's a pretty closed system and wouldn't matter. But if I were to use a bank card or ID or something else in his name, this can alter the influence/perception/composition of his identity thus making it something it wasn't previously. And if I knew enough to submit a legal name change or otherwise deprive him of something, that perhaps should be considered theft.
(While I use Clint Eastwood just because I saw BttF3 recently, the above applies to any other person.)
Of course, compare with copying a song - if, within the confines of one's home, it's in a closed system and not theft. But if you were to alter the master copy of that song or deprive the "owner" of that song... but how likely is that?
Their stance that they are fighting to see artists get paid is based on the theory that if they stop copyright violation, everyone will buy legitimate copies of the work and the record company will pay the artists.
But if they stop copyright violation, then it's quite easy for them to collude (more than currently) to raise prices even more.
The proper way to see the P2P'ers is as competition.
Anyone who says that the Bible advocates genocide and slavery really should pause for a moment and actually read or study it instead of simply using their little knowledge of it to pick a fight. It's like saying that you hated a certain character of a book that you've never read, you only hate the character because a friend of yours told you he was stupid.
There are passages from the Bible that make it appear to advocate genocide and slavery.
Do you have any quotes from the Bible in which genocide and/or slavery are specifically discouraged?
Surely they have statistics for quarterly, or monthly (or perhaps even weekly).
But making those statistics available would allow reporters et al to compare against news items (e.g. the Napster decision, which reportedly resulted in a SALES DROP when Napster was defeated). So I wouldn't expect it to happen. RIAA/IFPI has too much to lose if they disclose.
Come to think of it, how much of those sales losses are attributable to advertising (e.g. ads, parties)? I wouldn't be surprised if they managed to hide millions in absurd costs via some creative bookkeeping.
Company names are used as adjectives, not nouns. You wouldn't say you have several Microsofts, right? LEGO bricks, LEGO sets, LEGO kits, LEGO elements...
I really wanted to use some moderator points in this thread but NOBODY got it right!
You might already be doing this, but if you aren't, I suggest:
Mention the exact date/time/site/address they used.
For the newsletter, where it mentions that they opted in, don't merely mention the "fact" that they did. Also include the exact date/time (adjusted to their local time if possible, only need to do that once) and URL they used. If it's from a "partner", name the partner's website and date/time. Just a few more bytes per customer. And if you can do a reverse-lookup on their IP address, that's even better.
For an order, the short descriptive name of the most expensive item should be included in the subject line, e.g. "Your DressKids.com order for Embroidered Organza Dress and...", as this should instantly jog anyone's memory.
Ideally the date/time/site/address would be in both body and header (e.g. X-Subscribed-From, X-Subscribed-At - I wonder if there's a standard?). I hope you're already doing this.
Disciplinary Actions List - Bi-Bz... Surrender of license accepted. Effective July 1, 1993. BROWN & MAUGHAN,
AN ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION (COR 2529). MAUGHAN, MARK G. (CPA 38184)...
If there's a <TR> or <TABLE> within what would be the summary, put an ellipsis in its place:
Disciplinary Actions List - Bi-Bz... Surrender of license accepted. Effective July 1, 1993.... BROWN & MAUGHAN,
AN ACCOUNTANCY CORPORATION (COR 2529). MAUGHAN, MARK G. (CPA 38184)...
For anyone thinking of doing this, I'd suggest using domain names like "verisign1.com", "verisign2.com", "verisign-a.com", etc. - at least then they'd be easily tracked and filtered. (.*verisign[^.]*\.com)
Slashdot Mirror
I daresay that transmission completion in less than "real time" doesn't seem to be addressed in the claims (skimmed), but might or might not be a side-effect of compression (which they do repeatedly mention).
IANAL too.
I surely do hope that BBSes and pkzip count as prior art to throw out this patent...
- Trade secrets (e.g. food/drink formulas)
- Life isn't fair, why should inventors bother sharing when they don't need to share?
Patents were created to combat trade secrets; the money (iff licensed) is a side-effect.I thought most of them did analog compression (ISDN and computer channels excepted).
"If you want something done right, better do it yourself" doesn't apply to everything, but it does tend to apply to incremental improvements that depend on artistic creativity.
Stop the world, I want to change the channel!
At least with the current system there's somewhat of a filter in place for us mortals (even if it is only 5% after some number of revisions on each application).
My main thrust was that any "methods" that an end-user is expected to perform should not be patentable, regardless of the estimation of novelty.
Have you evaluated the patent with that mindset?
- What if they'd kept it a secret to themselves (unpublished)?
- What if they'd just published it but didn't explain how they did it (via neither code [copyright] nor method [patent])?
While single-clicking and double-clicking are common now, it's the double-clicking and long-time clicking on a PDA that's somewhat novel. (and I wish that QLaunch was older).- An address entry with a company name starting with "L" - for extra fun, make it long enough to occupy more than one line
- An address entry with a company name starting with "T" (optional?)
- An address entry with a company name starting with "I" (optional?)
- Perform the Graffiti 2 entry (downstroke followed by cross-stroke) in a new address entry in (obviously) the Company field.
I just now tried it and it happens for me too; Contacts 1.0.1 on OS 5.2.1. I'll bet you'll have an epiphany if you bother to try it again; even though this is a relatively oldish story, I hope you'll post results.As a sidenote, I have abandoned Graffiti almost entirely (except for menu stroke via Graffiti-anywhere on T3) and instead use MessagEaseST regularly.
(While I use Clint Eastwood just because I saw BttF3 recently, the above applies to any other person.)
Of course, compare with copying a song - if, within the confines of one's home, it's in a closed system and not theft. But if you were to alter the master copy of that song or deprive the "owner" of that song... but how likely is that?
The proper way to see the P2P'ers is as competition.
Do you have any quotes from the Bible in which genocide and/or slavery are specifically discouraged?
Using the tput command, you can be portable and get great results every time!
But making those statistics available would allow reporters et al to compare against news items (e.g. the Napster decision, which reportedly resulted in a SALES DROP when Napster was defeated). So I wouldn't expect it to happen. RIAA/IFPI has too much to lose if they disclose.
Come to think of it, how much of those sales losses are attributable to advertising (e.g. ads, parties)? I wouldn't be surprised if they managed to hide millions in absurd costs via some creative bookkeeping.
I really wanted to use some moderator points in this thread but NOBODY got it right!
Mention the exact date/time/site/address they used.
For the newsletter, where it mentions that they opted in, don't merely mention the "fact" that they did. Also include the exact date/time (adjusted to their local time if possible, only need to do that once) and URL they used. If it's from a "partner", name the partner's website and date/time. Just a few more bytes per customer. And if you can do a reverse-lookup on their IP address, that's even better.
For an order, the short descriptive name of the most expensive item should be included in the subject line, e.g. "Your DressKids.com order for Embroidered Organza Dress and...", as this should instantly jog anyone's memory.
Ideally the date/time/site/address would be in both body and header (e.g. X-Subscribed-From, X-Subscribed-At - I wonder if there's a standard?). I hope you're already doing this.
My speculation is that it caches the bloated application(s) into a RAM disk. Makes things quicker. RAM is cheap.
- Windows XP with Windows Media Player, 109 Euros.
- Windows XP without Windows Media Player, 99 Euros.
that would defeat Microsoft's current dumping tactic.For anyone thinking of doing this, I'd suggest using domain names like "verisign1.com", "verisign2.com", "verisign-a.com", etc. - at least then they'd be easily tracked and filtered. (.*verisign[^.]*\.com)
Just search Google. The Scrooge article is particularly exhaustive.