artp 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (212) comment rss

  • On the post: Once More With Feeling: Paid Software Doesn't Mean A Company Treats You Any Better Than Free Software

    artp ( profile ), 19 Dec, 2012 @ 12:03pm

    I know what you mean, Mike.

    I pay for a physical every so often, and I have yet to feel like the doctor and I are aligned when he pulls out the rubber glove.

  • On the post: A Couple Videos About Our Crazy Patent System

    artp ( profile ), 13 Dec, 2012 @ 09:13am

    Re: Re: Re: Fine, make some distinctions.

    As I recall from being on corporate teams, the team is made up of individuals, not corporations. It is common to have several names on a patent. The trouble is that the patent is then owned by the corporation as directed by those papers that you had to sign if you wanted to get a paycheck for your work.

    Clear now?

  • On the post: A Couple Videos About Our Crazy Patent System

    artp ( profile ), 12 Dec, 2012 @ 11:09pm

    Re: Fine, make some distinctions.

    Several people have proposed the first on Groklaw, including me. To this, I would add that patents should be non-transferable, and no exclusive licenses may be granted.

    People invent things. Corporations do not invent things.

    I like your second idea. Doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of being enacted.

  • On the post: A Couple Videos About Our Crazy Patent System

    artp ( profile ), 12 Dec, 2012 @ 11:05pm

    One data point on why Pharma patents don't make sense

    The Big Pharma companies don't do all their own research, or pay their own development costs.

    Here is a comment I posted at Groklaw:
    http://www.groklaw.net/comment.php?mode=display&sid=20121129053154687&title=The%20Push%20for%20Patents&type=article&order=&hideanonymous=0&pid=1018251#c1018631

    An excerpt:

    The Push for Patents
    http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012311230028

    On November 23, the Des Moines Register had a front page article entitled The Push for Patents, subtitled "Royalties Cushion Budget Cuts". And we here in Iowa know that when you elect Terry Branstad, that budget cuts are coming to EVERYONE!

    So it is a timely and relevant article here in Iowa, and I'm sure the natives took notice, although I was incommunicado for the next 7 days. Here's a summary.

    The University of Iowa took a $37 million dollar cut in royalties from patents from 2009 to 2011, from $43 to $6 million due to one expired drug patent based on the cytomegalovirus promoter. [Note: I have no idea what I just typed.]

    The U of Minnesota dropped $75 million in royalties over the same period. An expired anti-AIDS drug accounted for $10 million of that loss last year. Northwestern leads the nation with $191 million in royalties in 2011, mostly from Lyrica, an anti-seizure drug that is also being used for fibromyalgia.

    It also notes that patent royalty income to universities increased 4% each year from 2009, so the losers lose big when a popular patent expires.

  • On the post: The DVR That Watches You Back: Verizon Applies For 'Ambient Action' Detecting Device Patent

    artp ( profile ), 07 Dec, 2012 @ 07:43pm

    But... think about the children!

    I'm sure that they have a plan to eliminate them spying.. err monetizing.. err targeting our children, as that would violate a bunch and a half of federal laws.

    Haven't they?

  • On the post: HBO Has A Distribution Problem, But Just 'Going Without' Does Nothing To Push Them To Solve It

    artp ( profile ), 03 Dec, 2012 @ 11:02am

    I haven't watched TV in 20 years...

    ... and they still haven't gotten my message, so I guess those people are right. Although I do see TVs on when I walk through rooms where others are watching TV. I have watched as much as 5-10 minutes of TV at a time, realized that it hasn't gotten any better, and left.

    Let's compare this to another market. Let's say I am a farmer who wants to sell food to people. People like my food so much that some of them start buying their own seeds and growing their own food. I lose sales. Are they pirates? No, they just like the extra advantages they get when they grow their own food. They get fresher food. It takes time to get food from my farm to their table. They get more flavorful food. I have to pick fruit before it is ripe, and let it ripen on the way. Otherwise it gets bruised and rotten and nobody wants to buy it. Also it makes a terrible impression on people about my food's quality. They might even be making a "green" statement.

    I can either improve my food, improve my processes, or adapt my business model to help people get what they want. I can start focusing on markets closer to my farm, provide special packaging for riper fruit, set up subscription models for "greener" operations, and so on.

    Or I could create seed that doesn't grow true, using hybrids and genetic engineering. Or I could create a Terminator gene to stop those pirates from growing their own food... Wait, that's already happened, hasn't it?

    Never mind.

  • On the post: Stuxnet's Infection Of Chevron Shows Why 'Weaponized' Malware Is A Bad Idea

    artp ( profile ), 21 Nov, 2012 @ 07:33am

    No, this is GOOD news!

    Now maybe we can get Microsoft Windows declared a Weapon of Mass Destruction, and have it banned from export, or import, or maybe they'll just throw it all in an old missile silo? Who knows?

    Good things will happen, though, I can feel it!

  • On the post: At SEC: Porn Surfing Down, Waste Up, Stunning Disregard For Basic Computer Security

    artp ( profile ), 16 Nov, 2012 @ 08:50am

    I could do that job!

    And I'm disabled. They would have to let me waste half my day reading TechDirt and Groklaw instead of the whole day surfing porn, but I think that I could fill the functional requirements of the job just fine!

    I could even work from home. They obviously don't check on their employees, so that won't be a burden to them.

  • On the post: Larry Downes' Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week

    artp ( profile ), 11 Nov, 2012 @ 08:44am

    On humble companies

    First, great article! I enjoyed reading it. Maybe TechDirt can double the hits on it?

    I don't have the context of Julie Brill's comment, but humility in itself is not a bad thing for a company to have. Some of the companies I worked for had a goal to be a good corporate neighbor to the communities they were in. Given that Brill is with the FTC, I doubt she was thinking of anything so benign.

    But your comments on Microsoft miss the mark. Even though Microsoft is technologically irrelevant, they still control what OSs go on new computers, which is why I have only bought one (1) new computer since 1997. I can afford the mass market computers, but not he custom built ones that will load Linux for me.

    Beside this, Microsoft is a technological has-been with $50 billion in the bank. They can do a lot of damage with that money. Just look at the UEFI developments, the patent offensive against Android, the obvious influence-buying in Washington, and you can see some of the results of that $50 billion being spread around. It is the same effect that the **AAs have. They have never created anything, yet they have control of our cultural heritage and the money to make things stick their way.

    Don't discount important influences just because they are technologically irrelevant.

  • On the post: Judge Will Review If Apple/Samsung Jury Foreman Withheld Pertinent Info

    artp ( profile ), 09 Nov, 2012 @ 09:36pm

    "Bring your own expert to work" Day

    If Hogan causes trouble for this trial for anything, it will probably be for acting as his own expert in the jury room.

    As PJ pointed out at Groklaw, it doesn't give the opposing side a chance to challenge or rebut his arguments.

    And from listening to Hogan and compatriots after the trial, Hogan really believes in his abilities - and so did the jury - over and above what was presented in the courtroom.

    We will see what really happens with this, if anything, as the bar for jury misconduct is very high.

  • On the post: Judge Rejects Fox's Attempt To Shut Down Dish's Autohop Feature, But Indicates It May Still Infringe

    artp ( profile ), 08 Nov, 2012 @ 06:32am

    That's a novel claim

    Is Fox now claiming that they own the copyright to the advertisements, too?

    There is BIG money in the ad business. I wonder what Procter & Gamble would say about that? Or one of the big ad agencies?

  • On the post: When A Mouse Requires An Internet Connection, You're Doing 'Cloud' Wrong

    artp ( profile ), 07 Nov, 2012 @ 09:46am

    It's just a syntax error

    Replace every occurence of "cloud" with "Borg" Then it parses out just fine.

    I don't use cloud if I can help it.

    Another gripe around this:

    Home broadband routers/firewalls that require an Internet connection to configure them. This is SO brain-dead that I think someone should get an award from the Internet security version of the Darwin Awards.

    I used to configure network equipment BEFORE installing it. Through the handy little serial port connection that isn't being provided any more. Avoids all the pain and stress associated with a router that INSISTS on being at IP 192.168.0.1 regardless of what subnet it is sitting on. I remember some equipment that used to let you set its address with hardware selectors. Why, yes, thank you, I would like to reconfigure at least one node on my network to accomodate your skinflint marketing department's wishes.

    Thanks for the rant. That felt good!

  • On the post: California Ballot Measure Will Likely Ban Anonymous Speech If You Were Arrested For Urinating In Public

    artp ( profile ), 06 Nov, 2012 @ 02:23pm

    Sex offenders

    I have read (don't have the citation handy) that the largest group of people being put on the sex offender registry is young males between the ages of 14-16. We are criminalizing our children.

    Also, there is now no statute of limitations on child sex abuse, which ought to bring up a suitably huge can of worms. So we really need to start asking politicians when they started being sexually active. This should modify the classic answer, "But I didn't inhale." to , "Age 15, but we didn't kiss!"

  • On the post: The Other Tim's Favorite Posts Of The Week Post

    artp ( profile ), 03 Nov, 2012 @ 02:12pm

    Um, I suppose you're going to claim fair use?

    This note just in from the **AAs:

    102 songs, some repeated 20 times (gotta watch that dubstep!)
    2040 violations
    14 hops through 14 routers (for my case)
    28,560 violations
    Two copies on my computer (RAM and browser cache)
    57,120 violations
    200,000 users on Techdirt (?) the lawyers will adjust this in the final bill
    11,424,000,000 violations
    Somebody got interrupted and restarted the video (x2)
    22,848,000,000 violations
    Mash-up went viral and was replicated 2 million times (10 times replication over Techdirt users)
    228,480,000,000 violations
    $150,000 dollars per violation
    $34,272,000,000,000,000

    We'll settle for 34 quintillion dollars. Any bills will do, not just small unmarked bills as the world just doesn't have that much money.

    ---
    Loved it, though I usually get sort of tweaky with dubstep. Was only allergic to one tune. Excellent job! Let em know if I can throw in a dime or so for your legal bills. ;-)

    artp

  • On the post: John Mellencamp: Thou Shalt Not Permit The Internet To Derail Our Gravy Train

    artp ( profile ), 01 Nov, 2012 @ 10:45am

    Mellencamp! I know him!

    I heard him on the radio a long time ago. I liked his songs.

    But I heard him on the RADIO, and I never paid a cent for listening to his stuff. I never bought his albums. And though I am now trying to catch up on some music from "My Generation", I will definitely NOT be catching up on Mr. Mellencamp. Ever. Again.

    So how is the Internet any different than the radio?

  • On the post: Is The EU's New Directive On Clinical Trials Moving In The Wrong Direction?

    artp ( profile ), 25 Oct, 2012 @ 09:16am

    FDA approvals and public interest

    That is, even using the same figures from the same set of clinical trials, equally reputable organizations could come to different conclusions. Against that background, it's perhaps no surprise that the question of how much data must be released by drug companies during the approvals process, and in what form, is becoming an area of contention, because even small differences can tip the balance between a drug being approved and widely used -- and hugely profitable -- or barely used at all, and turning into a costly flop.


    In the US, the FDA is charged with protecting the safety of the public by ensuring that the pharmaceuticals being sold are documented to be safe. Yet that data is not available to the public because of corporate concerns about their Preciousss data.

    Whole areas of foods and drugs have NO public data available to ensure that the public has confidence in their efficacy. Try to find any public study related to the approval of GMOs. I'll wait... but only for a year or two. There aren't any. In fact, there are only three studies available at all, and two of them showed adverse effects on human digestive systems.

    Things need to change, and it runs much deeper than just pharmaceuticals. We need to take back our government from the corporations and financiers. Of course, they won't like it, and will throw a tizzy fit. They might create a depression until we mend our ways. But how important really is it to you to have an accountable government?

  • On the post: Sticking It To The (Camera) Man: Inventor Develops License Plate Frame That Defeats Red Light Cameras

    artp ( profile ), 25 Oct, 2012 @ 09:03am

    Re: Red Light Camera Defeated By Ape Suit

    I would love to take credit for that, being from Iowa and all, but at least in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, the ticket is issued to the car owner, and the city doesn't CARE who was driving. At least it doesn't go against your driving record, so I guess that is their justification for doing it that way.

    So there is no court to appeal to because it isn't a moving violation. The ticket is issued by some company out of state and not by the city. You can write to them with a sob story, but they'll eventually get their money. I was going to check their website to get the details, but they have broken links. What an outfit - they shouldn't be using technology at all.

    OTOH, there is a true story that is relevant. Back in the early 70s in Iowa City, First National Bank was robbed. The police report said that the robber was wearing a gorilla mask, a bright yellow raincoat and rollerskates. He left the bank and disappeared into the crowd. I loved Iowa City back then. The crowd was very colorful!

  • On the post: Sticking It To The (Camera) Man: Inventor Develops License Plate Frame That Defeats Red Light Cameras

    artp ( profile ), 25 Oct, 2012 @ 08:48am

    Re: Re:

    Then you won't technically get the ticket, and won't technically have to pay the fine. Let me know how that works out for you.

    I've seen jailhouse lawyers with better logic than that!

    Any system can be subverted. It is up to citizens to make government accountable. And government is not accountable today, so whose fault is that? Get off your duff and do something about it -- other than playing jailhouse games with flashes.

  • On the post: Sticking It To The (Camera) Man: Inventor Develops License Plate Frame That Defeats Red Light Cameras

    artp ( profile ), 24 Oct, 2012 @ 09:00pm

    "There's already a law against obscured license plates."

    I got pulled over in Houston once because I hadn't cleaned off the good ol' Iowa dirt off my license plates. Living on a gravel road can do the same thing as all that fancy technology. So why don't you just tape over your plate and be done with it?

    I've gotten camera tickets, and I don't like them at all. But despite my dislike of camera tickets, I would never support circumvention measures. If someone feels like they don't have to obey the law AND they don't want to pay the consequences, then they really aren't safe to be on the road with.

    The law that says that license plate has to be unobscured is one of those unenforced laws. I wish they would either enforce it or repeal it. Whether it is red covers or license plate frames, the fact is that I can't read your license plate half the time. Moisture, snow and street dirt can make the cover opaque. So your fellow citizens whom you just cut off in traffic can't call you in either. It's not just the police who need to see your plates.

    Even frames obscure information on some state's plates. Just leave off that stuff, and use a novel strategy to avoid tickets (other than camera-issued) -- Just pay attention! You will not only see the police car ahead, but you will be a safer driver.

    Thanks for sharing the road!

  • On the post: Economist's Defense Of Perpetual Copyright: It's Best To Just Ignore The Economics

    artp ( profile ), 24 Oct, 2012 @ 09:12am

    You wouldn't want to tax a basketball player who is making a lot of money

    And yet, when I was laid off and given a separation payment at the rate of one month's pay per year of service, the government taxed it as a windfall.

    The law does not make sense when it is made one little tiny piece at a time and stitched together with never-never thread by billionaire tailors.

    But I'm not bitter... much.

Next >>