People born in this country by accident share the same principles, because we added an item to the Bill of Rights (Fourteenth Amendment) to make it that way. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States..." We added that amendment because certain folks were saying that people born in this country "on purpose" did not have any rights because they weren't citizens; rights such as the right to vote, for example.
You're probably right that most people can't enumerate the rights...your lack of knowledge of the Fourteenth Amendment would be a case in point. But it isn't supposed to be the people following the rights, it is the government that has a duty to respect the rights.
The Bill of Rights, and the laws related to torture, apply to the people doing the torturing. The act of torture is a crime; it is not just a crime to torture citizens, it is a crime to torture anyone.
Have you been to the Texas legislature?
I guarantee there were no liberals involved in the creation of this law. It was purely a Republican cluster fuck.
He must have a rich daddy, friend in the admiralty, or a sympathetic politico; or something. Most people, the mere creation of such a device would have been proof of intent.
$670,000 per year? The council must not be very serious about fixing this problem, because surely they could come up with that amount for replacement, for the next 4 years.
This is a lack of commitment that does not bode well for 2019. Where will they come up with $670,000/year then? Won't it be easier to just relax the rules on forfeiture again?
All in all, this seems like pure posturing. It should not surprise anyone if these improvements are quietly repealed sometime during the next 4 years.
Re your last question, yes there are a lot of them in the RFC collection. See, the people that created a lot of the RFC's did it without getting a patent because they believed in the right of everyone to share in the benefits of the ideas they produced.
You're also right about three being the only option. Those seemed the most reasonable. But there's also:
4. Absolutely! No! Patented! Technology! in a Standard!
If you have more and better suggestions, do feel free.
They'll keep sitting on them, too. Wait until 2030, when the pressure will ramp up to extend copyright to 150 years; and then until 2110, when they'll be pushing for 300 years.
"It don't matter if I'm nevah doing nuthing but sittin' on this and lettin' it rot and fall down; it's my proppety!!!"
You know, I think he has the right of it. If we publish this, our enemies will all shout in unison, "See?! We knew you were kidding when you said torture was bad!!"
Realistically, this argument is getting sillier and sillier. All they're doing now is stretching it day by day, trying to wear out the people who want it published. They have an infinite list of excuses they will drag out one-by-one, forever.
I still will be surprised if it is ever published in a usable form.
But the companies gave the enforcement road maps to SEC and FTC in the first place. The agencies are just echoing the companies' concerns that we will find out what regulatory capture really means.
Mr. Magnate: "Isn't monopoly power wonderful? The d****d courts might keep ruling against us, but we can still make them do what we want!"
Fawning lapdog: "You're right, sir. The only thing I don't understand is: Why only 7 days? Why not 39,104,709,231,087,094,382,098,340,293,890,249 days?"
Well,...consider that there are three choices.
1. Let the creator of the patent, who won standard status, pick and choose who gets to benefit from the patent--even for a fee. ("We don't like you because you're our number one competitor: No license for you.")
2. Tell the creator of the patent, "Thank you for all your good work. We're taking it from you and giving it away now."
3. Find a way to allow the creator to be paid fairly while ensuring the creator can't pick and choose winners.
Basically, you can pick just one.
Who knew all these passengers had such desirable stuff in their luggage?
Oh, wait. The government did. So let's open all the bags--because: forfeiture. That stuff that is "obviously illegal" makes a lovely revenue flood.
Only problem now is all the d****d agents stealing from the government's forfeiture flood...
There'll always be one more reason to hold up the report. Don't hold your breath that we'll see the report soon. Frankly, I haven't seen a reason to bet on anything other than, "Never!"
I agree that fees should be permitted, to benefit the holder of the patent.
But to prevent groundless refusal of licenses (as seems to be the case here) the patent should be conferred upon the standards organization, which collects the fee on behalf of the original owner.
The theory is that the standards organization has a primary goal of promoting the standard, not of promoting their proprietary supremacy.
How about vexatious patent litigator. Is that better now?
(Miquetoast) We aren't sure our merger (slavering) will utterly crush our competitors heads and leave us as the reigning totalitarian monopoly...(Milquetoast)...*ahem*...negatively affect our competitors...(slavering) but we certainly hope so!!
Demand for non-disclosure
As part of the demand, requires the recipient to enter into a non-disclosure agreement. Patents are explicitly public, for good reason; a company that insists on a non-disclosure before identifying the patents involved in the claim, is evidence of a vexatious patent litigator.
Demand for contractual recognition
As part of the demand, requiring the recipient to contractually recognize the validity of the patent in addition to paying, is evidence of a vexatious patent litigator.
Demands against users but not manufacturers
Demands made against the users of a device, in the absence of claims against the company that manufactures it, are evidence of a vexatious patent litigator. This is particularly true when manufacturer has the resources to litigate effectively and users do not, indicating that the goal is not enforcement but simply money.
This is an amazing accusation. I don't know which is worse: That Neflix is being accused of paying an extortionate demand from those who did create the fast lanes; or that Netflix is being accused of competing vigorously in a business environment that the FCC commissioner allowed to exist and even encouraged.
The only reason for the "enthusiasm" was a temporary ruckus in the press. Now that the ruckus has died down a bit: Why would we be surprised to find the enthusiasm was faked?
Of course it would have to be faked: If lawmakers kept showing real enthusiasm, all those law enforcement types would show up waving terrorist attack and dead kiddie flags and make a loud ruckus. That will scare the populace and lead to an even louder ruckus.
Must not take away law enforcement toys if we will have to brave terrorist attack/dead kiddie flags.
Hey, intelligence guy: This Anonymous Coward just used the words "shoot" and "president" in the same post. You'd better investigate.
But, while you're doing that, be careful you don't cause any chilling effects on society.
What's the score now?
So the new score is: State 3, citizens -3000.