|
Authored by: alisonken1 on Thursday, February 07 2013 @ 06:41 PM EST |
Title: Kerection -> Correction
Comment: Anything else needed to identify/amplify the
correction
---
- Ken -
import std_disclaimer.py
Registered John Doe^W^WLinux user #296561
Slackin' since 1993
http://www.slackware.com[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: bugstomper on Thursday, February 07 2013 @ 08:25 PM EST |
Please type the title of the News Picks article in the Title box of your
comment, and include the link to the article in HTML Formatted mode for the
convenience of the readers after the article has scrolled off the News Picks
sidebar.
Hint: Use Preview to check that your links are ok. Avoid a Geeklog
"feature" that posts long links broken by inserting line breaks in the
URL at punctuation points such as
<a href="http://www.example.com/xyzblahblah_
blahblah/
abcblahblah/defblahblah?
abcblahblah
.html">text</a>
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: bugstomper on Thursday, February 07 2013 @ 08:26 PM EST |
Please stay off topic in these threads. Use HTML Formatted mode to make your
links nice and clickable.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Father pays teen not to use Facebook ... I see CFAA issue coming - Authored by: Tolerance on Thursday, February 07 2013 @ 08:56 PM EST
- Yandex search engine pushs Microsoft’s Bing aside .. - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 12:34 AM EST
- What is Groklaw? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 12:37 AM EST
- Ubuntu Smartphone Shipping in October .. - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 01:35 AM EST
- What is "Justice"? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 04:32 AM EST
- Apple sued by David Einhorn over cash pile - Authored by: tiger99 on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 04:35 AM EST
- Shergar - Authored by: Nick_UK on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 06:54 AM EST
- New LibreOffice seems to be good. - Authored by: LocoYokel on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 08:09 AM EST
- Dell buy-out may be in trouble - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 08:27 AM EST
- article on the CLS Bank issue - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 09:55 AM EST
- New XKCD - Perl Problems - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 10:17 AM EST
- Lowering The Bar - How to Start a Brief - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 10:23 AM EST
- people quoting Florian again - Authored by: designerfx on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 12:04 PM EST
- The largest prime number yet discovered – all 17 million digits of it - Authored by: JamesK on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 12:27 PM EST
- Canadian business wants out of antispam regulations - Authored by: JamesK on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 01:29 PM EST
- Aaron Swartz wanted to save the world. Why couldn’t he save himself? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 02:15 PM EST
- Given that Apple has $135B in cash and Intel has a market cap of $105B: should Apple buy Intel ? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 03:03 PM EST
- The DEA Wants to Use a $37 Pot Sale to Seize a $1.5 Million Anaheim Building - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 04:55 PM EST
|
Authored by: bugstomper on Thursday, February 07 2013 @ 08:27 PM EST |
Please post your transcriptions of Comes exhibits here with full HTML markup but
posted in Plain Old Text mode so PJ can copy and paste it
See the Comes
Tracking Page to find and claim PDF files that still need to be
transcribed.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 07 2013 @ 09:36 PM EST |
The encoder or decoder can be a processor, [...] (ASIC),
[...] (FPGA), [...] (CO- DEC), [...] (DSP), or some other electronic
device
that is capable of encoding the stream of pictures. [emphasis
added]
I'm not sure why they mentioned hardware at all,
they've covered all bases.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 07 2013 @ 09:58 PM EST |
So a software patent must disclose an algorithm? Does that not invalidate the
vast majority of software patents that are currently in existence? If this
stands up on appeal (hopefully to the supreme court), this would be a very very
good thing for the industry as a whole. Or am I reading this wrong?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Silver lining? - Authored by: jonathon on Thursday, February 07 2013 @ 10:16 PM EST
- What? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 02:26 AM EST
- Silver lining? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 10:12 AM EST
- method and means - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 11:27 AM EST
- Silver lining? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 12:53 PM EST
- yes - Authored by: designerfx on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 04:40 PM EST
- yes or no? - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 08:31 PM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 02:13 AM EST |
Wonder how many reports get that right?
Law is tough. Too bad more journalists weren't also lawyers.
Wayne
http://madhatter.ca
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 12:09 PM EST |
... the Judiciary will finally realize software is nothing but
abstract.
RAS[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 03:00 PM EST |
How come Microsoft's ex-FAT patents are OK, but Motorola's aren't?
Please note that I'm not questioning the courts, but I'm wondering how come
Microsoft and Apple seem to be getting off easily on using others' patents while
Motorola and Samsung are getting the hard end of the stick.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Gringo_ on Friday, February 08 2013 @ 08:33 PM EST |
I think Motorola got shafted here. Although I entirely
agree with Groklaw's
stand on software patents, means plus
function claims are common, and
Motorola's are no worse than
anybody else's.
The judge said...
"encoding and decoding are
entirely distinct functions. Thus, a
portion of the
specification related to encoding is in no way relevant to
decoding, and thus an algorithm for encoding cannot be said
to be 'clearly
linked' to a decoding function."
The judge is dead wrong
here. If "one skilled in the art"
is given the specification for one side of
the codec, he can
develop the other. The fact that the MPEG-1 standard does
not include a precise specification for an MP3 encoder has
in no way hindered
the development of a myriad of original
encoders. I know, because I developed
one myself. Give me a
specification for an encoder, and I'll make you a
decoder.
Give me a spec for a decoder, and I'll make you an
encoder.
However, overall, the judge is right on when he
says...
Although the specification describes how one of
skill in the
art would ascertain what blocks to consider when decoding,
the
specification provides no guidance as to how one of
ordinary skill would
actually decode the considered blocks.
... Simply put, this amounts to an
unbounded claim
encompassing all means for performing the decoding
function.
The judge is wise. I agree entirely with
that conclusion.
(And even if an algorithm was included, would code developed
from it have the required level of performance? That is the
key in codec
development - getting a practical level of
performance, beyond simply
decoding.)
However, how many software patents are out there that
would
fail Judge Robart's approval? There must be thousands!
Maybe even the mp3
patents held by Fraunhoffer. They will
come down on you no matter how you
implement an mp3 codec.
Fraunhoffer claims all means of encoding and decoding,
contrary to the judge's demand. According to Wikipedia...
In
September 1998, the Fraunhofer Institute
sent a letter to several developers of
MP3 software stating
that a license was required to "distribute and/or sell
decoders and/or encoders". The letter claimed that
unlicensed products
"infringe the patent rights of
Fraunhofer and Thomson. To make, sell and/or
distribute
products using the [MPEG Layer-3] standard and thus our
patents,
you need to obtain a license under these patents
from
us.
Does this mean Fraunhoffer's patent and all the others
will be struck down overnight now? That would be such a
wonderful outcome if
that happened. However, I think this is
only going to affect Motorola, and
that is patently unfair. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|