6 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (88) comment rss

  • On the post: US Gov't Supports Keeping Patents Difficult To Invalidate

    6 ( profile ), 22 Mar, 2011 @ 06:47pm

    "Is "6" here and "6" at a legal blog one in the same?"

    I am the same the world over. The Alpha, if not also the Omega.

    Unless of course you're talking to Tricia.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_Six_(Battlestar_Galactica)

    But that's kind of a different context.

  • On the post: US Gov't Supports Keeping Patents Difficult To Invalidate

    6 ( profile ), 22 Mar, 2011 @ 06:45pm

    "Is "6" here and "6" at a legal blog one in the same?"

    I am the same the world over. The Alpha, if not also the Omega.

    Unless of course you're talking to Tricia.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_Six_(Battlestar_Galactica)

    But that's kind of a different context.

  • On the post: US Gov't Supports Keeping Patents Difficult To Invalidate

    6 ( profile ), 22 Mar, 2011 @ 05:22pm

    "I still think it's important, because in those few cases where it would apply, it get rid of a hindrance to innovation."

    Meh. To be clear, it won't hinder innovation, it will spur innovation, indeed, publish it for all to see, the ultimate in spurring innovation. It will only hinder the implementation of innovation. Which of course is probably what you meant, but you could be more tidy and less outraged.

    Also, while I have your attention, if you could kindly stop using the word "debunked" forever the rest of the world would appreciate it. It just makes you sound like a nut-case consipiracy theorist. Of course we all know that you're just an economist, or at least that you play one on the internet. And while being an economist puts you close to being a nut-case conspiracy theorist, it doesn't really (necessarily?) make you one.

  • On the post: US Gov't Supports Keeping Patents Difficult To Invalidate

    6 ( profile ), 22 Mar, 2011 @ 05:17pm

    Re: Re:

    Give me 99.9c with a bar over the last 9 and I'll take that deal.

  • On the post: US Gov't Supports Keeping Patents Difficult To Invalidate

    6 ( profile ), 22 Mar, 2011 @ 04:10pm

    ""As you can see from the amicus briefs, and from a letter previously sent to the Attorney General by over 260 signatories, this is an absolutely pivotal case that threatens the ability of inventors and innovative organizations to survive," "

    That is just them being overly damatic prima donnas.

  • On the post: US Gov't Supports Keeping Patents Difficult To Invalidate

    6 ( profile ), 22 Mar, 2011 @ 04:08pm

    Just to be clear Mike, as all of those in the field will tell you, this case, and the potential differnce in standards would have a negligible effect on 99.9% of patent cases.

    The difference between preponderance of the evidence and clear and convincing evidence is so academic that it practically doesn't matter irl.

    This is all a bunch of hublah about nothing.

  • On the post: Patent System Gone Mad: Google Doodles Is Now Patented

    6 ( profile ), 22 Mar, 2011 @ 03:52pm

    Guys don't worry about it.

    Computer readable mediums never comprise instructions guys so don't even worry about the claim.

    A device claim must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure. Not in terms of instructions.

  • On the post: The Five Senators Who Refuse To Say If They Anonymously Killed The Whistleblower Bill

    6 ( profile ), 18 Feb, 2011 @ 07:45pm

    "?Jeff Sessions"

    "?Mitch McConnell"

    Same ol' sht, different day.

  • On the post: Why This Year's Physics Nobel Winner Never Patented Graphene

    6 ( profile ), 09 Oct, 2010 @ 01:11pm

    This baby is as old as the hills.

    You guys are also missing something that this researcher was probably aware of. They're working with the material itself, they're not inventing applications for it. The material itself has been around for a very long time. See the Wiki article about it.

    "An early detailed study on few-layer graphene dates back to 1962.[12]"

    And there are other papers on the single layered graphene structures as well that are referenced in the wiki. References abound to 102b claims to the material they're using.

    The thing is, people just recently started jumping on board because some people figured out that there were some useful properties of this old material that warrented further study.

    And, like the guy told him, if the material is all that useful, then they will start cranking out applications for the various "inventions" utilizing the graphene material structure. He wasn't really being arrogant, he was telling the man what was going to happen.

  • On the post: Back When The Senate Tried To Ban Dial Telephones

    6 ( profile ), 22 Sep, 2010 @ 12:55pm

    Mike I think you might want to take a look at your history books for what kind of "dial" telephones they were talking about at that time. Those things were a PAIN IN THE ARSE to use and I'm quite sure that a bunch of old senators would not want to use them if they could have an operator do it for them.

  • On the post: Comic Book Writer Mark Waid Defends Copying, Points To The Value Of The Public Domain

    6 ( profile ), 30 Aug, 2010 @ 12:28pm

    Never fear, for technology is here!

    Guys, once harddrives get up to the 100 terrabit capacity for your average off the shelf hard drive, pretty much everyone will likely get their hands on a fully loaded record of practically all music/movies ever made. Of course, newly released stuff won't be on there, but, still. It will be fun to see how copyright folks deal with people peddling all the recorded works in human history on the street in china for 50$.

  • On the post: Why Aren't More Companies Sued For Bogus 'Unlimited' Service Claims?

    6 ( profile ), 12 Aug, 2010 @ 03:58pm

    If you feel jilted you can take them to small claims court and get 500$ statutory damages if they rule for you. In VA at least.

  • On the post: Plastic Surgeon Sues Online Reviewers Who Gave Her Bad Reviews

    6 ( profile ), 15 Jul, 2010 @ 01:20pm

    Does anyone here realize that "Kimberly Henry" is the name of the girl on Nip/Tuck who was Christian Troy's (plastic surgeon) main love interest? I get the feeling that this might all be bogus.

  • On the post: Is Intellectual Property Itself Unethical?

    6 ( profile ), 14 Jun, 2010 @ 07:34pm

    "Except very little can actually be kept secret."

    Mike, you have very little idea how much in manufacturing can be kept secret. Even saying such a thing shows off your ignorance. You were like the business guys that used to come into the fab and look around and ask questions about sht that nobody cared about in the fab. You didn't have the slightest clue about wtf the methods were that were being used in the fab. If you did you'd understand that they were closely gaurded company secrets save for the patents they'd take out on some of them. The same is true in all fabs.

    "Darryl, I actually worked for Intel back in the 90s, so we're on a subject I'm familiar with. As others have pointed out, Intel's success was due to their *operations* and *manufacturing*. Intel's fabs had much higher yield rates than their competitors. So even when AMD chips are technically better (as they sometimes are) the economics still works strongly in Intel's favor. In other words, even in a world where Intel's chip design is not protected, Intel is still likely to succeed due to their superior manufacturing."

    K, so you worked for Intel and say that their manufacturing was superior. What happens when their manufacturing isn't "protected" via method claims in patents? What's to stop AMD from copying their manufacturing methods? Intel would lock that sht up tight as they possibly could. And trust me, Intel has got some pretty nice sht in terms of manufacturing methods disclosed in patents that could have just as well become trade secrets that would have been VERY difficult, if not impossible to "reverse engineer". If you think otherwise you've obviously never tried to reverse engineer microchip fab techniques. You might as well spend money on developing your own methods rather than spending time/money on reverse engineering theirs.

    "Studies -- mentioned on this site -- have proven this claim to be totally false, so it's pretty silly for you to make it. I believe the study found that in something like 90% of patent lawsuits, it was clear that the accused had no knowledge of the patent/invention in the first place."

    I believe that he was referring to them having seen the "other side's" products etc. then having copied them. Whether or not they had seen the other side's patent is not being discussed by him, to him it is irrelevant.

    Now, Mike I agree with you that a lot of the things that are patented these days probably shouldn't be, and I also agree that IP is unethical. It is, on it's face, you guys don't need to delve into philosophy or some nonsense to figure that out. But, on the other hand, if the public wants trade secrets to come out then it has either got to do away with trade secret law and get whatever scraps happen to fall out, or keep some sort of patent system. Note that under the non-patent system with scraps just falling out those would not usually be published and not categorized in any meaningful way both of which the patent system does provide.

    Either way though, you need to keep yo sht straight man. With no patent system you're going to have more trade secrets, unquestionably. And furthermore, if you took away trade secret laws then you'd have insane security at companies trying to accomplish trade secret's without the law.

  • On the post: Court Says Album Is A Single Work For Copyright Purposes; Each Song Is NOT Separate Infringement

    6 ( profile ), 04 May, 2010 @ 04:21pm

    "should be clear that the process to show violation is in fact a damage,"

    Nobody made them hire lawlyers son. The actual court proceedings can be done at not that great of a cost.

  • On the post: Measuring Success By Fan Passion, Not Billboard Chart Position

    6 ( profile ), 19 Apr, 2010 @ 11:45am

    I just saw JMT in concert on Sat night at the 930 club in DC. They were pretty good, but I still kinda wish someone would make a microphone so that you could hear the words they're saying even when the base is so loud your chest feels like it is exploding.

  • On the post: Guy Who Makes Simple Caller ID App For Android Forced To Shut Down Due To Patent Threat

    6 ( profile ), 25 Feb, 2010 @ 11:57am

    "Is a cell phone classified as an 'analog telephone line interface' ?"

    I doubt it, and many other problems would arise in successfully accusing someone who merely wrote an App for ANDROID of infringment.

    However, like I said, the guy that was writing the App probably doesn't know his arse from his elbow in patent matters, or in patent litigation. And he probably can't afford to pay someone who does.

  • On the post: Guy Who Makes Simple Caller ID App For Android Forced To Shut Down Due To Patent Threat

    6 ( profile ), 25 Feb, 2010 @ 09:25am

    If you read the patent claims it appears to be impossible for anyone simply writing an app to infringe the claims directly.

    Fact is he probably doesn't infringe, but doesn't have the time/money/knowledge to fight the suit.

  • On the post: ICanHasLawsuit? Pet Holdings Sues Other Site For Framing Failbooking With Better Domain Name

    6 ( profile ), 03 Feb, 2010 @ 01:04pm

    Mike you will want to take a look at these papers on copyright.

    Does Copyright Law Promote
    Creativity? An Empirical Analysis of
    Copyright’s Bounty

    http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/articles/2009/11/Ku-et-al.-Does-Copyright-Law-Promote-Creativity-62-Vand.-L.-Rev.-1669-2009.pdf

    Copyrights as Incentives: Did We Just Imagine That?

    http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1515964

    Real Copyright Reform

    http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1474929

    And you might want to add some of them to your favs.

  • On the post: ICanHasLawsuit? Pet Holdings Sues Other Site For Framing Failbooking With Better Domain Name

    6 ( profile ), 03 Feb, 2010 @ 01:02pm

    Mike you will want to take a look at these papers on copyright.

    Does Copyright Law Promote
    Creativity? An Empirical Analysis of
    Copyright’s Bounty

    http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/articles/2009/11/Ku-et-al.-Does-Copyright-Law-Promote-Creativity-62-Vand.-L.-Rev.-1669-2009.pdf


    Copyrights as Incentives: Did We Just Imagine That?

    http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1515964

    Real Copyright Reform

    http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1474929

    And you might want to add some of them to your favs.

Next >>