Danny 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (38)

• On the post: Lord Finesse Learning How The Streisand Effect Works: Tons Of People Re-Upload Dan Bull's Video

  

  Danny ( profile ), 17 Jul, 2012 @ 02:16am

  Re:

  You realise of course that when you watch a youtube video that video is downloaded to your hard disk. It is the same for any content on the internet, that's how it works!
  
  Its a simple operation to pull that file out of your cache and re upload. Obviously Dan uploaded it to a locker for people to download but that is not the only way to skin this cat!

• On the post: Patent Troll Sues Facebook, Amazon, Oracle, Linkedin, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley & More For Using Certain File Systems

  

  Danny ( profile ), 17 Jul, 2012 @ 02:01am

  Re:

  All of the features in the patents can be found in various filesystems dating back to the 70's.
  
  They are simply trolls.

• On the post: Patent Troll Sues Facebook, Amazon, Oracle, Linkedin, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley & More For Using Certain File Systems

  

  Danny ( profile ), 17 Jul, 2012 @ 02:00am

  Considering NFS was created in 84, pre-dating the patents by a couple of decades the judge must throw this shit out.

• On the post: Are Books Printed With Disappearing Ink Really The Best Way To Make People Read Them?

  

  Danny ( profile ), 12 Jul, 2012 @ 04:56am

  Re: Re: Re:

  Yes!
  
  Made me chuckle anyway.

• On the post: Google Sued For Patent Infringement For Mobile Chrome

  

  Danny ( profile ), 12 Jul, 2012 @ 04:50am

  Re:

  Another question for them would be, "does the patent cover my laptop?" as my laptop is a wireless device.

• On the post: Google Sued For Patent Infringement For Mobile Chrome

  

  Danny ( profile ), 12 Jul, 2012 @ 04:47am

  Re: Vagueness

  This is the reason why software patents fail.
  
  Kill of the software patents as they have no use. Software is covered by copyright already. If two people come to the same solution with different methods this is fine, its only not fine when someone copies the source or just copies the binary but both issues are covered by copyright.

• On the post: UK Judge: Samsung Wins Over Apple In Patent Dispute Because Its Tablet Isn't As Cool As iPad

  

  Danny ( profile ), 09 Jul, 2012 @ 11:18pm

  Re: Not a Patent dispute!

  They can't fight functionality patent issues in the UK due us not recognising software patents.
  
  SOftware is already covered under copywrong.

• On the post: UK Judge: Samsung Wins Over Apple In Patent Dispute Because Its Tablet Isn't As Cool As iPad

  

  Danny ( profile ), 09 Jul, 2012 @ 11:16pm

  Re:

  I like he way you argue that the ability to NOT expand storage is a feature and not an anti feature. Along with the other anti features you have listed.
  
  Fanboy fail!

• On the post: And So It's Come To This: Samsung/Google Forced To Degrade Features In Patent Dispute

  

  Danny ( profile ), 08 Jul, 2012 @ 02:16am

  Re: Re: k.

  I remember OS 7 but am unsure of the indexing search you are talking about.
  
  The search you mean may be the Unix 'Find' tool, which was not even remotely invented by apple.

• On the post: The Warehousing And Delivery Of Digital Goods? Nearly Free, Pretty Easy, Mostly Trivial

  

  Danny ( profile ), 07 Jul, 2012 @ 02:57am

  Re: Re:

  The heat energy absorbed whilst the unit is on or even just during the day far outweighs any energy gained whilst storing data.
  
  The thing about flash and hard disks is they actually start in a higher energy state before you put data on them as you change 0xFF (all 1's, highest energy) to whatever data you have.
  
  So I would counter the argument that kindles get heavier and would say they actually get lighter by an atogram. But that is coming from an electronic engineer (me) who has slightly more grasp of physics and how flash works than the guy that original said this argument (Professor Kubiatowicz) who is a computer scientist.

• On the post: FBI Continues To Insist There's No Reason For Kim Dotcom To Be Able To See The Evidence Against Him

  

  Danny ( profile ), 06 Jul, 2012 @ 09:04am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

  Money laundering is one of the more funny things Dotcom is charged with.
  
  Money laundering is where a criminal organisation makes money 'legal' by pedalling through a legal business and in the process disguising where the money came from.
  
  For the charge to make sense he has to have received all of the $150 million by illegal means. Then he also has to have moved the money back into his own possession using some external company in order to hide where it came from.
  
  For starters the vast majority of stuff available on Megaupload has been proven to be non infringing, or rather they have failed to prove that it is infringing. Secondly his company was selling a service and not files so the first point is irrelevant anyway.
  
  The company is also very open about their profits, that is how they come to $150 million. So them 'laundering' any of it is a joke.
  
  I tell you what, I am accusing you of money laundering. I'm gonna extradite your ass over hear so I can kick it!

• On the post: US Gov't And Hollywood Have Turned Kim Dotcom Into A Beloved Cult Hero

  

  Danny ( profile ), 06 Jul, 2012 @ 06:40am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

  I second that!

• On the post: FBI Continues To Insist There's No Reason For Kim Dotcom To Be Able To See The Evidence Against Him

  

  Danny ( profile ), 06 Jul, 2012 @ 06:09am

  Re: Re: Re:

  You just bite it surely? That would get you to the centre quicker anyhow!
  
  Although not sure how that proves a civil crime becomes criminal.

• On the post: Judge Posner: Do Most Industries Even Need Patents?

  

  Danny ( profile ), 06 Jul, 2012 @ 05:59am

  The UK doesn't recognise software patents. I am actually unsure why any other system does either. And in spite of this the UK has a huge game industry writing some of the most memorable games of the past 20 years.
  
  Software is not a physical invention. You cannot just copy it to clone it, you have to rewrite it yourself unless of course you get a copy of the source but that is industrial espionage and a completely other legal playing field with criminal implications.

• On the post: FBI Continues To Insist There's No Reason For Kim Dotcom To Be Able To See The Evidence Against Him

  

  Danny ( profile ), 06 Jul, 2012 @ 03:52am

  Re:

  Fail. The US has yet to prove any reason for him to be extradited.
  
  Their only reasoning is, 'we managed to bribe the shit out of the NZ officials to raid the poor guys home violently so extradite him already'?

• On the post: How Not To Innovate: Trying To Create An Exact Replica Of Another Service

  

  Danny ( profile ), 04 Jul, 2012 @ 04:43am

  Re: Fails for a different reason.

  Facepalm.
  
  You mean apple does just fine after copying the iPhone from Samsung, Nokia, LG, etc, etc.
  
  The iPhone was not new or unique when it came out, lots of similar phones had been out for ages. Its just that apple sells to a lot of people that like things because they are made by apple, fanboys if you like. And said fanboys believe that nothing came before the iPhone.

• On the post: Exceptionally Troubling Ruling In The UK: Owners Of Links Site Guilty Of 'Conspiracy To Defraud'

  

  Danny ( profile ), 28 Jun, 2012 @ 08:02am

  Re: Re:

  Its almost the same here in the UK.
  
  Sometimes they just buy them am house or if its Peter Mandelson you just take him on a cruise.

• On the post: Research Shows: You Don't Need Patents To Disclose Information

  

  Danny ( profile ), 28 Jun, 2012 @ 05:14am

  I work for a small electronics company and we develop stuff for quite a few larger companies.
  
  Everything we design and produce is manufactured by external companies. Not once has anything we produce or design been cloned or stolen by a competitor and all without a single patent.
  
  Sometimes we sign NDA's with our clients as they believe they are being protected but never with our manufacturers.