Shoot the poachers on sight. It's the only way to be sure.
102 posts • joined 12 Jul 2012
Shoot the poachers on sight. It's the only way to be sure.
If Lego wants to sell more then they should do something about their obscene prices. Go to a branch of Wilco (in the UK) and you can get compatible bricks, and fancy designs at about a quarter of the cost of the Lego stuff. The instructions are good too. If more people bought this, then Lego might think twice about fleecing their fans.
I didn't use them much (and it seems nor did many others), but they have helped me out of tight spots before, selling components (yes, they still sell them, in the Worcester branch at least), and the odd other item.
It looks like it'll be mail order only now, which gets expensive when you just want one transistor.
It can piss right off.
So it's clear that there's another journo writing about this memo without actually going to the trouble of reading it. I'd expect better here.
I usually tell such callers to go an F- themselves, and be as obnoxious as my whereabouts permits. They might get the idea then that they are genuinely pi$$ing people off with their crappy job, and give it up for a better one.
I look forward to this news item filling a few anti-male columns in the Guardian.
Personally, I wouldn't believe anything the Guardian say about gender. They are obsessed with it. Or more correctly, they are obsessed with being anti male.
They were programs back then (and still are to me), not apps.
"I've already made about 10 films today doncha know, including "man in shopping centre", "customer in Next", "citizen in petrol station"...
I really could have done without that changing room scene...
Then it's not for me. The price is rather off-putting too.
Never verb a noun.
But I believe Andrew has got this spot on. Hopefully this will be the product that forces people to re-evaluate their relationship with Apple.
Could you recommend a router that is relatively easy to configure in this way? Preferably too, one to which an external antenna can be added (as I will need it to create a WIFI bridge to a home-office in the garden (or is a separate device usually used for that?)).
At last! Some justification for my bad habit of reading other people's media, be it newspapers, computers, or phones, that are in view.
I paraphrase, but wasn't it something like this that Lewis Page said of Fukushima after the tsunami struck it? I still chuckle at his take on things there.
I suppose in that example they probably wouldn't own the copyright either as the client would probably own it - and the client definitely didn't press the shutter button.
It's rare that the client would own it, but may do if the particular contract said so. In the case you suggested, the studio would own it, as the assistant would be an employee of the studio, and first ownership (in the UK at least) goes to the employer for work done by an employee. But even so, I suspect that the assistant wouldn't own it, but it would be owned by the person making all the creative decisions, i.e. the main photographer.
You do realise that the EPO is a completely different organisation to the EU (and UPC) don't you?
Also, the judges in the UK are technically qualified (at High Court and Appeals Court levels at least) and are very well respected.
Your wife charges $1400 per hour? I really must up my rates.
As a patent attorney, I heartily endorse this article. The EUIPO made a bad decision there.
The previous section was rather unclear, and left many questions unanswered. It therefore acted to prevent attempts at settlement before going to court. The new text tries to address the problems, and so should be better for everyone, and result in fewer court cases.
"I actually owned one [a boomerang] once."
There's a joke there somewhere.
Just publish the Cease And Desist letters.
That reminds me of that punk band crAss (with the anarchy-A in the middle):
"While the generals sip bacardi, the private feel the pain.". It was actually quite a good song. I've not heard any Crass records for far too long.
to be extremely rude to the caller, when I receive these calls. I know they are only doing a job, but they are well aware that the job is to pester people who do not want their services. I thus hold them guilty by association. Hopefully they will then leave the company, and get a proper job instead.
Well pwned there.
Bit of a problem when you pour the tea from the pressurised container, and it starts boiling away though....
... then whitehouse.com will get you up.
Think what this will do to publishers like Private Eye. They'll be sued to death in months. It must be stopped. Please do so.
If they've got that power, then the general meter reading guys don't seem to use it. I turned down entry to them many times in my old house, because they'd knock on the door, and ask to read it. I said I'd let them if they could tell me who I was. Every time they gave the name of the previous occupant, who left several years before. They always seemed happy enough though after being politely told to go away.
What a guy. If only I could fit a quarter of this into my life.
As it's Apple,I hope they get taken to the cleaners by the trolls.
Patents last 20 years from their filling date
Smart watches - almost as useful as smart meters!
There you go Apple, you can have that slogan for free.
Apple will take it, and then sue you for printing it here.
I believe the author is trying to spin something here that doesn't match reality. The Unified Patent Court is nothing to do with the European Patent Office. The EPO will continue to grant patents as it always has, but at the grant stage the applicant will have the option of choosing, effectively, an EU-wide patent, rather than the individual country patents that are currently available. Then, the EU-wide patent will come under the auspices of the Unified Patent Court. It is, at that point, nothing to do with the EPO anymore. This sentence: Although the regulation empowers local courts to handle patents, which in theory should require less central bureaucracy, the EPO has morphed into a bureaucracy of over 7,000 staff. therefore makes no sense.
Yes, this really is unbelievable. I'm a patent attorney and usually approach these stories with some scepticism, but could hardly believe it when I saw it was a real utility patent application.
It won't (surely!) get granted, but either way, it does the reputation of the patents system no good.
Why on earth are you putting articles like this up for? They demean your reputation, and make you look like a corporate shill.
Absolutely fine in Worcester.
I recommend any interested party to seek a less biased review of the judgement than the one presented here.
I don't always agree with your line, but this is a great read. such persistence. Poor Alan must have been turning the Cupertino air blue every time you send an email.
Just think of those forged £1 coins as a form of crowdsourced quantitative easing, and the problem disappears.
A friend of mine used to do that. But in his defence, he was a trainee pilot who was practicing (with his wife acting as no doubt a very bored co-pilot) the various procedures one does on such a trip. It all helped him pass a subsequent interview, and since then he may have taken you on holiday somewhere.
"So - when it doesn't work properly - what will the users be doing wrong?"
They'll be folding it wrong.
Sorry Dobbs, you're no thought leader and not really that funny. This really isn't a laughing matter
Personally I was sniggering throughout the article. Maybe I've got a less refined sense of humour than you.
Bit tricky to sell after that though.
Surely it should be frikking lasers.
Do you mean the UPC? That will be (or would have been) German, French and English judges mainly, with the option of having local judges. If you do mean the EPC (European Patent Convention) then that is unchanged with Brexit, where only local judges are involved. UK patent judges are very switched on, and techically savvy.
There are a few flaws in your piece:
"This activity is primarily enabled by the US's massively dysfunctional patent system, a system that will rubber-stamp patent applications often with minimal vetting - resulting in a system choked with applications ranging from the spurious to the wildly ludicrous"
The US Patent office does not "rubber stamp" patent applications with minimal vetting. In my experience as a patent attorney, they examine them and throw them out based upon bad understanding of the technology, and you have to fight pretty hard to convince the examiner they are wrong. They are not great at their job, but they tend to go the opposite way to what you are suggesting.
You go on to say:
"Some time later we were alerted that an American company had been granted a patent in the US for a similar technology and that they were trying to register the patent in Europe. We contacted the European Patent Office and provided links to our prior art in the public domain, and the US patent application was duly dismissed by the EPO as illegitimate."
This makes no sense. The EPO cannot influence a US patent application, and same goes vice versa. I presume you mean that the company applied at the EPO for a patent similar to their US one, and you alerted the EPO to the existence of your case. In such a circumstance it's pretty likely that the EPO would have found your case anyway, and used that against the application. It does help however to submit prior art to the EPO that you are aware of (which is free to do, and very straightforward - look up the filing of observations at the EPO if you wish to do it)
" In other words, Europe wasn't vetting US patents, and neither was the wider tech community – consequently dodgy patents from the US were pouring into Europe unchecked."
The EPO don't vet US patents as I said earlier. They have no standing there. And the EPO will provide a very rigorous examination of any applications made to it by US companies, as they will to all other applicants.
There's a slightly odd tone to this report, like you are wanting to say "Burn the Paedos!", but can't quite bring yourselves to do it. As Warm Braw says, there's a perfectly good reason we don't publicly track and name those on the, er, register, as it would just encourage vigilante attacks. That might make a few feel better in the short term, it's pretty bad for society.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018