josaka

14 ms·

91.
by josaka 11y ago
I'd be curious to hear a principled explanation for why a patent on a circuit implementing algorithm should be patentable while the same functionality is not worth protecting when encoded in memory as software.
92.
by josaka 11y ago
If the arrows were used or sold publicly earlier, they are (almost certainly) prior art. This doesn't necessarily mean the patent is invalid, though. Folks generalize excessively when discussing what a patent covers. You'd have
93.
by josaka 11y ago
According to the inventors' employer's website at the time of filing of these patents: "Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), a Fortune 500 company, is the largest employee-owned research and engineering comp
94.
by josaka 11y ago
FWIW, it looks like they acquired these patents from a company that actually does make something. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Applications_Internati... This is speculative, but these patent filings were prob
95.
by josaka 11y ago
Not sure if this is the same form of self assembly, but this video has a nice explanation of at least one type: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Dp6EFyROT4
96.
by josaka 11y ago
This is correct. They only ask for a judgment that they do not infringe, not that the patent is invalid. They may have done this b/c 1) it's cheaper; 2) they don't want to pay for free-riding by others who will benefit from
97.
by josaka 11y ago
Low latency, at least by geographic distance, alternative.
98.
by josaka 11y ago
This will have interesting effects for US patents that are practiced on AWS machines in Canada to serve client devices in the US. All the steps of a method claim in a patent must be performed in the US to infringe, so choosing to use machi
99.
by josaka 11y ago
I think that is correct. This case is a little misleading because there were both patent and copyright claims at the district court level. As a result of the patent claims, the Federal Circuit had jurisdiction over the entire case, even th
100.
by josaka 11y ago
Same here. I got in, though, after about five minutes of re-trying. $599 base, $32 shipping, plus tax, totaled $680.
101.
by josaka 11y ago
Some countries have this system, e.g., I think Belgium at least used to grant patents without examination. A patentee would then sue and the validity would be taken up for the first time upon suit.
102.
by josaka 11y ago
This suit is probably in retaliation for an earlier Corel suit against Microsoft this summer. http://www.fosspatents.com/2015/07/corel-software-sues-micro... . This one reason companies keep a war-chest of patents
103.
by josaka 11y ago
Possibly no infringement. Design patents are easy to design around. Just change the design. The real threat is when the plaintiff can get back damages for pre-suit infringement. You can't do anything about your previous use of the de
104.
by josaka 11y ago
Also worth noting is the effect of recent sales volume, which tends to hurt the company with more revenue, i.e., Apple, in these negotiations. E.g., my 1,000 patents and 10 million in product sales leaves me less exposed in a patent fight
105.
by josaka 11y ago
Podcast and book on the same topic, both recommended: http://freakonomics.com/2015/11/19/does-early-education-come... http://www.amazon.com/Thirty-Million-Words-Building-Childs/d...
106.
by josaka 11y ago
This is true, re. manufacturing defects. I used to work in a DRAM fab, too, and observed similar patterns. Re. cosmic rays, it's surprising, but I think they can cause errors: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2
107.
by josaka 11y ago
"GPL and other open source licenses are arguably not commercially negotiated contracts" This is the key issue. It seems like a copyright license to code under GPL would be commercial, in the sense that the parties are exchanging
108.
by josaka 11y ago
In the US, "laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas are not patentable." See Mayo v. Prometheus ( https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=505607866460473... )
109.
by josaka 11y ago
I'm hooked. I never worry about the battery. It's dead simple to drop my phone on a charging pad at home, at work, and in the car.
110.
by josaka 11y ago
Zhang's patent US 8,697,359 is limited to techniques in which "the Cas9 protein cleaves the DNA molecule." If this new technique does not use the Cas9 protein in this fashion, it would potentially provide a design-around, m
111.
by josaka 11y ago
Some "ideas" are, if they qualify as trade secrets (think Coke's formula). Other's are free to reverse engineer those ideas, but a former employer/vendor/customer exposed to those ideas under an NDA can come a
112.
by josaka 11y ago
It's also really hard to prove the absence of theft, e.g., of things like trade secrets in strategy, customer lists, and financial models. The consequence is that even if you're in the right, you can spend several hundred thousan
113.
by josaka 11y ago
IAAL. The patent must enable what is claimed. Here is the USPTO's instructions to examiners on the topic: The information contained in the disclosure of an application must be sufficient to inform those skilled in the relevant art ho
114.
A Future with Perfect Price Discrimination in Software(papers.ssrn.com)
1 points by josaka 12y ago|0 comments
115.
by josaka 12y ago
As a product of the system, agreed 100%. Also, the true cost should account for lost income while in law school. As opportunities improve for those students who could excel in other areas, the lost income exceeds the tuition cost.
116.
by josaka 12y ago
Page 29 of the opinion at the following link addresses one of the theories for invalidating the '142 patent. The original patent owner sold the patented product more than a year before filing for a patent, which normally kills your pa
117.
by josaka 12y ago
I think it was challenged in this case. Page 6 of the verdict form asks if the '142 patent claims are valid, so presumably the defendant put on an invalidity case. (And it would be rare not to.) The prior art would have to pre-date
118.
by josaka 12y ago
Custom plates: 8BB8 8BB8.
119.
by josaka 12y ago
Neat idea. Minor correction: This is a published patent application, not a patent. According to USPTO records, it published last month, but examination has not begun.
120.
by josaka 12y ago
These stats do not reflect the effect of recent changes in the law. Money being awarded now is from lawsuits launched at least one or two years ago. New case filings are down 40% year-over-year[1], and anecdotally, we're hearing that

More ›