Authored by: gfim on Thursday, February 21 2013 @ 06:00 PM EST |
In a comment on the earlier article, Jonathon Swift (a.k.a celtic_hackr) raised
a point about patent marking of Monsanto's beans. My reply to that comment will
be lost in the mists of time, but it may be important. So, with your
forgiveness, I'll repeat it here...
Assume that Monsanto did mark all of the patented soybeans and the farmer
planted them (as he is allowed to). When the crop grew, would the beans produced
from that crop have the marking? If it was genetic marking (i.e. the beans were
genetically modified to have "Patent XXX" printed on them), then the
progeny would have it too (subject to mutations). But, if Monsanto just printed
ink onto the original patented beans, then the progeny beans would not have the
marking and would thence be unpatented. QED!
---
Graham[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 21 2013 @ 06:09 PM EST |
Published on Feb 21, 2013
President Obama responds to a question in a
Google+ Hangout to discuss his State of the Union Address. Watch the full
hangout: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQ4
Zo0XyNsw
One posted comment:
I think "responds" is
appropriate because he never answered the question. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, February 21 2013 @ 06:32 PM EST |
Here is an interesting example Koh should probably learn from:
The
judge had to consider, Edis said, "whether the worry this document generates is
such as to create a substantial concern it[the jury] has sufficiently grasped
its task to be allowed safely to continue". [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: bugstomper on Thursday, February 21 2013 @ 06:53 PM EST |
While searching around looking for more detail on the amicus curiae in Oracle vs
Google that was filed by Eugene H. Spafford et al I happened upon a blog post he
wrote on his experience as an expert witness in a different patent case:
My Time in Delaware –or- Fun With Patent
Litigation
Here is the lead sentence of his much longer
article
I was recently involved in a major patent infringement
case. Quite a few people knew I was involved and asked me questions I couldn’t
answer until the case was finished. That happened recently — the jury returned a
verdict on December 20 — and so I’m going to recount a little of the experience
here.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 22 2013 @ 12:06 AM EST |
Does anybody know of an application that will allow me to generate (picture
files of) historical maps - the extend of the Habsburg Empire in 1876, say, or
the Frankish empire in 800.
It will need to run in Linux.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 22 2013 @ 06:41 AM EST |
The Fair Access to Science and Technology
Research Act, or Fastra,
which would force free access to
copyrighted articles based on
government-funded research,
was reintroduced into the U.S. Senate and House of
Representatives Feb. 14.
Bill
Forcing Government Agencies to Publish
Research Papers Reintroduced in
Congress (Bureau of
National Affairs). [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 22 2013 @ 06:48 AM EST |
Angry
Mammals
Waynehttp://madhatter.ca [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 22 2013 @ 06:51 AM EST |
Time
Robot
Waynehttp://madhatter.ca [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 22 2013 @ 09:32 AM EST |
Abstract:
Despite popular perception of increased
government surveillance, a longitudinal study of the Annual Reports on the Use
of Electronic Surveillance published by Public Safety Canada between 1973 and
2011, demonstrates the opposite trend. This paper first outlines this decline
to situate the use of electronic surveillance by federal law enforcement. The
second section of the paper advances legal, political, and practical influences
which are likely contributing to diminished use of wiretapping by police. The
purpose of this paper is to present quantitative evidence to better inform the
ongoing debate around extending “lawful access” regimes in Canada. By using
official government statistics as a foundation, this paper provides a practical
grounding to the theoretical academic and legal research which often informs
law, legislation and public policy governing the use of surveillance
technology.
Nicholas
Koutros & Julien Demers, Social Science Research Network[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 22 2013 @ 08:10 PM EST |
After reading this article it sounded eerily like a certain other IP licensing
program:
Microsoft, Nikon Ink Latest Android Patent Deal [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|