- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Pot, meet kettle: a response to Steve Jobs' letter on Flash
|
|
|
Comments (31)
11 earlier comments in the full thread.
Dino, the more you explain the law the more idiotic and corporate-owned it sounds. (I'm not complaining that you explain this stuff, I'm glad you do.) The idea that anyone who purchases a product should be liable in anyway for what the manufacturer did is ridiculous. I really want to use cuss words, but I respect the LXer TOS. LXer has earned respect, unlike US laws.
TC -- yup.
With regard to liability, the problem comes from the fact that the consumer is not liable for what the manufacturer did, but that use of protected materials also constitutes an infringement.
So... Buy the item, no problem. Use the item -- oops!
With regard to liability, the problem comes from the fact that the consumer is not liable for what the manufacturer did, but that use of protected materials also constitutes an infringement.
So... Buy the item, no problem. Use the item -- oops!
Quoting:End users who use infringing technology are every bit as liable as the manufacturer who bill sit in.What does "bill sit in" mean? Or is that "builds it in"?
Quoting:Buy the item, no problem. Use the item -- oops!So wouldn't the manufacturer be liable for selling a device under false pretenses, that using said device according to the instructions would be legal?
Can't call it "blackmail" any more, too many people would think one is making racial references. Like being niggardly.
TC,
> the more you explain the law the more idiotic and corporate-owned it sounds.
I couldn't agree with you more. Every time I hear someone proclaim about how "the law" is supposed to restrain business excesses, I have to laugh. Who do they think WROTE the laws in the first place?
Congresscrawlers don't even read them, much less write them.
Anarchy is looking better and better.
TC,
> the more you explain the law the more idiotic and corporate-owned it sounds.
I couldn't agree with you more. Every time I hear someone proclaim about how "the law" is supposed to restrain business excesses, I have to laugh. Who do they think WROTE the laws in the first place?
Congresscrawlers don't even read them, much less write them.
Anarchy is looking better and better.
gus3 -
Nope. I could see some potential there, but am pretty sure it would fail on intent.
Presuming that warranties of suitability for purpose are not disclaimed, there might be something to be had in that direction.
Nope. I could see some potential there, but am pretty sure it would fail on intent.
Presuming that warranties of suitability for purpose are not disclaimed, there might be something to be had in that direction.
Dino, AFAIK that only goes for US law, isn't it?
I was at the 'talk' about RepRap where Mr. Bowyer was speaking about differences between UK and US law.
As far as I understood, under UK law (and probably most European laws) it's permitted to take a patent, and print the stuff right at your own home using a RepRap.
I was at the 'talk' about RepRap where Mr. Bowyer was speaking about differences between UK and US law.
As far as I understood, under UK law (and probably most European laws) it's permitted to take a patent, and print the stuff right at your own home using a RepRap.
Don't know Hans.
By and large, EU patent law is much more similar to than different from US law.
I could be wrong, but I believe that it is an infringement to make a patented device without the permission of the patent holder.
There are some very narrow exceptions to the rule, and a practical reality in the sense that "Gee, who's going to Know?" and people who don't know don't sue.
By and large, EU patent law is much more similar to than different from US law.
I could be wrong, but I believe that it is an infringement to make a patented device without the permission of the patent holder.
There are some very narrow exceptions to the rule, and a practical reality in the sense that "Gee, who's going to Know?" and people who don't know don't sue.
@dino: Isn't it that you can make a patented device, you just can't use it?
Don't forget this copyright/patent/trademark treaty in the works is going to homogenize things even more, internationally speaking.
Sander --
Not my understanding. The split that I mentioned before for user liability -- the manufacturing and distribution liability was still there, but owned by the device manufacturer (which would be you if you made it). Use liability was still there for the user once you turn it on.
Not my understanding. The split that I mentioned before for user liability -- the manufacturing and distribution liability was still there, but owned by the device manufacturer (which would be you if you made it). Use liability was still there for the user once you turn it on.
Quoting:Don't forget this copyright/patent/trademark treaty in the works
People are upset about it to such a degree, I'm not sure if it's going to make it.
> People are upset about it to such a degree, I'm not sure if it's going to make it.
My "fear", if I can call it that, is that it will get passed, in deliberate obscurity.
Like a lot of laws, now that I think about it.
The US Congress has a very nasty thing called a "voice vote". This is where they wait until the middle of the night when there are only a few representatives left in the chamber, and when the last of the opposition just went to the bathroom, then they call a "voice vote" and since there is no opposition the law passes.
And on a voice vote there is no recording of who voted which way, so everyone is off the hook. Plausible deniability.
Sausage and legislation. But at least sausage tastes good.
My "fear", if I can call it that, is that it will get passed, in deliberate obscurity.
Like a lot of laws, now that I think about it.
The US Congress has a very nasty thing called a "voice vote". This is where they wait until the middle of the night when there are only a few representatives left in the chamber, and when the last of the opposition just went to the bathroom, then they call a "voice vote" and since there is no opposition the law passes.
And on a voice vote there is no recording of who voted which way, so everyone is off the hook. Plausible deniability.
Sausage and legislation. But at least sausage tastes good.
Well, if ACTA is meant to harmonize stuff, it cannot be US only.
People in the Europarliament (those who are ought to represent us, the European citizens) have shown to care about this issue. So have people in the Dutch 'parliament', and probably abroad too. I'm not sure about other important countries such as Japan, Australia and Korea, but at least it is getting some attention.
Also something interesting, was a book called 'The Electric Jeans' by some economist in my country. It's about the nonsense of the current patent system. Articles or books about that issue are nothing new, at least not on technology websites. However, the fact that some economist (who gives his opinion on Dutch Tele everyday) cares and talks on radio about it, shows even people 'outside the technology sector' start to care.
Generally, at least in my country, engineers and 'technologists' (the tech savvy) are severely underrepresented in the parliament. The parliament is filled with economists, criminologists, juridical types, political scientists and so on (the same goes for the EuroParliament). So if there's a discussion on tech-websites and tech-papers about patents, they are not even aware.
However, if economists start thinking about the issue, things might finally change. Somewhere in the next two decades...
In the meantime, BSA is lobbying to make what the Euro Patent Office is doing have a 'legal foundation' instead of being based on quicksand.
People in the Europarliament (those who are ought to represent us, the European citizens) have shown to care about this issue. So have people in the Dutch 'parliament', and probably abroad too. I'm not sure about other important countries such as Japan, Australia and Korea, but at least it is getting some attention.
Also something interesting, was a book called 'The Electric Jeans' by some economist in my country. It's about the nonsense of the current patent system. Articles or books about that issue are nothing new, at least not on technology websites. However, the fact that some economist (who gives his opinion on Dutch Tele everyday) cares and talks on radio about it, shows even people 'outside the technology sector' start to care.
Generally, at least in my country, engineers and 'technologists' (the tech savvy) are severely underrepresented in the parliament. The parliament is filled with economists, criminologists, juridical types, political scientists and so on (the same goes for the EuroParliament). So if there's a discussion on tech-websites and tech-papers about patents, they are not even aware.
However, if economists start thinking about the issue, things might finally change. Somewhere in the next two decades...
In the meantime, BSA is lobbying to make what the Euro Patent Office is doing have a 'legal foundation' instead of being based on quicksand.
> However, if economists start thinking about the issue...
Much to Caitlyn's chagrin, I will point you over to Mises.org
And a site I found recently, http://www.againstmonopoly.com/
Two places filled with economists pointing out the gross problems with "Intellectual Monopoly".
From what I've seen of the various objections to ACTA, they seem to be more of "that's not how we want to do it" rather than "let's not do that at all".
Much to Caitlyn's chagrin, I will point you over to Mises.org
And a site I found recently, http://www.againstmonopoly.com/
Two places filled with economists pointing out the gross problems with "Intellectual Monopoly".
From what I've seen of the various objections to ACTA, they seem to be more of "that's not how we want to do it" rather than "let's not do that at all".
Well, what I'm basically saying is that it is important for the discussion to move 'beyond Mises.org' into 'mainstream press'.
Indeed, apart from some 'websites focused on technical issues' there are more websites, also those related to economics, who have written about the issue before, but I think what I heard on the radio today marked an important milestone in moving it to 'mass media'. Mises.org just isn't mass media today I'm afraid.
Indeed, apart from some 'websites focused on technical issues' there are more websites, also those related to economics, who have written about the issue before, but I think what I heard on the radio today marked an important milestone in moving it to 'mass media'. Mises.org just isn't mass media today I'm afraid.
Pretty much the only time the mass media will give actual deregulation any air time is when they have their pet "radicals" on, such as Peter Schiff or Ron Paul.
That British delegate to the European parliament, whose name I can't remember right now, got some heavy air time last year, but nothing since.
I don't believe that the "mainstream media" is unbiased on this issue. They don't understand that their profits don't come from copyright, but from being "first to market".
That British delegate to the European parliament, whose name I can't remember right now, got some heavy air time last year, but nothing since.
I don't believe that the "mainstream media" is unbiased on this issue. They don't understand that their profits don't come from copyright, but from being "first to market".
@TXT:
"I am amenable to a small payment for the unauthorized use of my IP."
When I can figure out how to pay for the unauthorized use of your IP, I will do so. However If I pay, then the use is authorized. I want to pay for unauthorized use.
Every time I try to pay, the use changes to authorized use and I don't get what I paid for! This leads to an incredibly high level of dissatisfaction.
Because of my high level of dissatisfaction, I will discontinue all use.
"I am amenable to a small payment for the unauthorized use of my IP."
When I can figure out how to pay for the unauthorized use of your IP, I will do so. However If I pay, then the use is authorized. I want to pay for unauthorized use.
Every time I try to pay, the use changes to authorized use and I don't get what I paid for! This leads to an incredibly high level of dissatisfaction.
Because of my high level of dissatisfaction, I will discontinue all use.
#6,
That's mighty bigg of you ... I think, but let me reread your comment again a few times more before I commit to a binding deal.
YBT
P.S. I must admit to some confusion, since from all appearances this is your first post on this thread. You wouldn't stoop to pulling my leg would you?
That's mighty bigg of you ... I think, but let me reread your comment again a few times more before I commit to a binding deal.
YBT
P.S. I must admit to some confusion, since from all appearances this is your first post on this thread. You wouldn't stoop to pulling my leg would you?
Quoting:What does "bill sit in" mean?
Hey, I missed that one.
To me, it sounds like a garbled spelling of the Oxford Dictionary approved "Bullshitting". Let's try:
Quoting:End users who use infringing technology are every bit as liable as the manufacturer who bullshitting
Makes more sense to me!
Hans,
What more can I say?
YBT
Quoting:Quoted: End users who use infringing technology are every bit as liable as the manufacturer who bullshittingIf I ever were or become a user of Facebook, I would be one of your very major fans.
What more can I say?
YBT
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post