Why are non-Mellonville residents allowed to get patents at all? I'm wondering how it benefits those of us subject to Mellonville patent law.
Why are non-Elm Street residents allowed to get patents at all? I'm wondering how it benefits those of us subject to Elm Street patent law.
If you think patents are a good idea (personally I'm unconvinced, at least for the general case), then that good idea is a better idea if it's global.
Re: So what's the diff between college campus and a Facebook pag
My dearest Anna,
A public college is considered by the law to be an arm of the government - the same rules apply there as in the public square. Speech there is protected by the 1st Amendment.
A platform run by a corporation is a private venue - like a private home. Within a private venue, the owner is entitled to make and enforce whatever rules she likes - people who don't like those rules are free to leave or setup their own venue. The 1st Amendment doesn't apply, because it's not the the government that is making the rules.
And therein lies the difference. There is no contradiction in Techdirt's position.
The difference between the rules for private vs. public venues exists for the good reason that it's far more difficult to leave a country (or setup a new one) than it is to leave (or create) a private venue.
Re: Re: Price effect on patient/doctor choices, not just "transp
A 3rd party system where the 3rd party that's paying ALSO decides on treatments (as per the British NHS) is completely compatible what I described.
The problem is that party A decides on treatment, and party B gets to pay for it. That's what's unworkable.
If we do move to a universal healthcare system in the US (not what I advocate, but it would be no worse that the current mess), ultimately the Feds will decide who gets what treatment.
I'm all for rescuing "trafficked" girls, but only if they want to be rescued.
It sounds like this woman (girl, whatever) doesn't want to be rescued.
If she's been told that people think she's being trafficked for sex work, and that she has options to get out of it, yet still wants to be released...why in God's name don't they release her?
Either she's not being trafficked or she genuinely prefers sex work in the US to sitting in the CBP's jail. Either way, let her go.
Photographs are a simple reproduction of the light that fell on the image sensor (as processed, non-creatively, by software in the camera).
I think the idea is that photographs deserve (some level of) copyright protection because there is usually an element of creativity in arranging that light.
If a photographer sets up a scene, arranges props, controls lighting, devises framing, enhances creatively in Photoshop, etc., there's pretty clearly an element of creativity involved.
But not in every photograph. At the other extreme, a security camera snapping photos of a parking lot every minute, 24/7, doesn't seem to me to involve any creativity at all.
So if we're going to go with the traditional copyright notion that creativity is of the essence, then some photos qualify, and others don't.
I mean, there's this "Internet" thing. With that, anybody in Russia can read the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal if they like (well, paywalls aside...)
More importantly, they can read all the Russian news they like, as long as the sites are located outside Russia.
On the post: Lawsuit: School Strip-Searched An 8-Year-Old Because Someone Found Feces On A Bathroom Floor
Obligatory South Park reference
https://southpark.cc.com/clips/155276/dookie-in-the-urinal
On the post: What's Australian For Streisand Effect? Perhaps It's Fatty McFuckhead
Re: Re:
Hi, AC. Let me guess - you're NOT rich.
And therefore, (somehow) you conclude that people who are rich must be scumbags.
Have you ever heard the term "sour grapes"?
Have a little more pride than that, AC. Rich people are just like you and me - only with more money.
On the post: Chuck Yeager Sues Airbus For Mentioning That Chuck Yeager Broke The Sound Barrier
Re: any rights to the event probably belong to the US Air Force
That simply isn't how rights work.
Maybe it's how you think they work. Or how you think they ought to work.
But it's not actually how they work - at all.
On the post: Chuck Yeager Sues Airbus For Mentioning That Chuck Yeager Broke The Sound Barrier
Re: using the name of Chuck Yeager in a sneaky way that is liken
Yes, they are. You may not like it.
But it's completely legal to do that.
On the post: Something Has Spooked AT&T Enough To Warrant Bringing Their Top Lobbyist Out Of Retirement
Starlink
If I were AT&T, I'd be terrified by Starlink.
https://www.starlink.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink_(satellite_constellation)
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/09/spacex-says-itll-deploy-satellite-broadband- across-us-faster-than-expected/
Real competition = Scary.
Watch AT&T try to get it outlawed.
On the post: AB InBev Fails To Get 'Patagonia' Trademark Suit Dismissed
Re: Re: Re:
I'm curious - what part of the world do you live in, PaulT?
I live in Boston, and Patagonia is a familiar brand. I'm not a skiier.
The first time in my life that I heard the name "Helly Hansen" was in your post above.
On the post: USPTO Drops Its Demands For Applicants' Green Cards
Re: Can someone explain
On the post: Student Sues College After Being Told Not To Exercise His First Amendment Rights Without The School's Permission
Re: So what's the diff between college campus and a Facebook pag
My dearest Anna,
A public college is considered by the law to be an arm of the government - the same rules apply there as in the public square. Speech there is protected by the 1st Amendment.
A platform run by a corporation is a private venue - like a private home. Within a private venue, the owner is entitled to make and enforce whatever rules she likes - people who don't like those rules are free to leave or setup their own venue. The 1st Amendment doesn't apply, because it's not the the government that is making the rules.
And therein lies the difference. There is no contradiction in Techdirt's position.
The difference between the rules for private vs. public venues exists for the good reason that it's far more difficult to leave a country (or setup a new one) than it is to leave (or create) a private venue.
On the post: The NY Times Got It Backwards: Section 230 Helps Limit The Spread Of Hate Speech Online
"NY Times" and "Got It Backwards"
I think you repeated yourself there, Mike.
On the post: The Patent And Trademark Office Is Apparently Branching Out Into The Immigration Enforcement Business
LLCs?
Can the Chinese applicants not simply form a US LLC and then apply in the name of the LLC?
Seems like anti-immigration theater.
On the post: Elsevier Says It's Infringing To Link To Sci-Hub; Hypocrite Elsevier Links To Sci-Hub All The Time
Re: Re: Because copyrights belong to corporations, not people.
Corporations, like Soylent Green, are made of people.
There's plenty to complain about current copyright law, but corporations per se have nothing to do with those complaints.
On the post: Crazy Copyright Suit Over Gigi Hadid Posting A Photo Of Herself To Instagram Shows Absurdity Inherent In Photo Copyrights
Re: Re: Re: Re: photographs a simple reproduction?
It's amazing how many people make confident statements about my life experiences based on a short post.
Confident and very wrong.
Anyway, which part of "enhances creatively in Photoshop" did you miss?
On the post: Telecom Union Got Hoodwinked Into Supporting AT&T's Shitty Merger
Telecom Union != ITU
Attention Bellheads:
"Telecom Union" is the CWA trade union.
Do not confuse with the "International Telecommunications Union"; https://www.itu.int, which is not a trade union.
On the post: CBP, DHS Using Quasi-Scientific Guesswork To Turn Adult Immigrants Into Minors
Re: Re: Isn't sex trafficking involuntary?
I get that, but you can make that same argument about ANY kind of work.
"Show up at Boeing on Thursday and start designing airliners, or we torture your parents to death."
That kind of thing is a problem that needs to be solved wherever the criminals are threatening family members.
You can't use it as an excuse to take away autonomy from people.
On the post: Drug Prices Are So Insane That The NY Times Is Recommending The US Gov't Just 'Seize The Patents'
Re: Re: Price effect on patient/doctor choices, not just "transp
A 3rd party system where the 3rd party that's paying ALSO decides on treatments (as per the British NHS) is completely compatible what I described.
The problem is that party A decides on treatment, and party B gets to pay for it. That's what's unworkable.
If we do move to a universal healthcare system in the US (not what I advocate, but it would be no worse that the current mess), ultimately the Feds will decide who gets what treatment.
There is no other practical solution.
On the post: CBP, DHS Using Quasi-Scientific Guesswork To Turn Adult Immigrants Into Minors
Isn't sex trafficking involuntary?
I'm all for rescuing "trafficked" girls, but only if they want to be rescued.
It sounds like this woman (girl, whatever) doesn't want to be rescued.
If she's been told that people think she's being trafficked for sex work, and that she has options to get out of it, yet still wants to be released...why in God's name don't they release her?
Either she's not being trafficked or she genuinely prefers sex work in the US to sitting in the CBP's jail. Either way, let her go.
On the post: Drug Prices Are So Insane That The NY Times Is Recommending The US Gov't Just 'Seize The Patents'
Price effect on patient/doctor choices, not just "transparency"
We could have perfect transparency, but that wouldn't solve the problem.
Doctor: Treatment A costs $10 and has a 95.1% chance of saving your life. Treatment B costs $1,000,000 and has a 95.3% change of saving your life.
Either way, your insurance company will pay for it.
Patient: I'll take Treatment B. 95.3% is higher than 95.1%.
Unless patients and doctors (whoever's doing the deciding) bear the costs instead of 3rd parties, we're never, ever going to fix this problem.
On the post: Chinese Border Agents Now Installing Malware On Foreigners' Cellphones
The usual advice
Backup your phone before entering <Country X>.
If you have anything on it that's confidential, do a factory reset.
Enter <Country X>, let them do whatever they want.
Restore from backup.
And, of course, don't send anything confidential unless it's encrypted. (But this is wise everywhere - esp. when on Starbucks's WiFi.)
On the post: Crazy Copyright Suit Over Gigi Hadid Posting A Photo Of Herself To Instagram Shows Absurdity Inherent In Photo Copyrights
Re: Re: photographs a simple reproduction?
Photographs are a simple reproduction of the light that fell on the image sensor (as processed, non-creatively, by software in the camera).
I think the idea is that photographs deserve (some level of) copyright protection because there is usually an element of creativity in arranging that light.
If a photographer sets up a scene, arranges props, controls lighting, devises framing, enhances creatively in Photoshop, etc., there's pretty clearly an element of creativity involved.
But not in every photograph. At the other extreme, a security camera snapping photos of a parking lot every minute, 24/7, doesn't seem to me to involve any creativity at all.
So if we're going to go with the traditional copyright notion that creativity is of the essence, then some photos qualify, and others don't.
On the post: Russian Government Demands All Foreign Press Outlets Register For The Privilege Of Delivering News To Russia
Are they going to build their own Great Firewall?
If not, I don't really see the point of all this.
I mean, there's this "Internet" thing. With that, anybody in Russia can read the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal if they like (well, paywalls aside...)
More importantly, they can read all the Russian news they like, as long as the sites are located outside Russia.
Next >>