How can it not be the Captain's log? If has been on every starfleet vessel, and it never makes mistakes. Name one bad order that the Captain's log has given. You can't because it hasn't. The log will NEVER let me down.

There is no problem with putting a tracking device on a child as long as it is only used for good. Since there is nothing that could possibly go wrong, it is probably a good idea.

It is probably a trademark issue. The stranger the name (i.e., distinct) the easier it is to protect the name. If you named your operating system, Functional Operating System, you will have a harder time than if you had named your operating system, Big Slick.

If the information is need-to-know only, then giving the people that need-to-know false information will lead to wasted time. If a person doesn't need to know, then the person shouldn't have the information in the first place. The example in the article of burying useful information in a sea of noise still presumes that someone can exceed their access in the first place. Those things should be preventable in the first instance.

For political reasons, it couldn't be called a tax. The Supreme Court wasn't impressed by the semantics.

At least initially, replicating someone's fingerprints should be too expensive for general use. Most of us wouldn't be worth impersonating.

I agree that this is a subtle point. I always assumed that these scammers were taking a shotgun approach and trying to get as many responses as possible. I always thought it was about volume and not efficiency.

I agree with one caveat. Since he is telling the story, he gets to spin it to his advantage. I noticed that he only quotes her and not himself. He may not have been as reasonable as it sounds.

You can't talk about crushing innovation in the abstract. First, what affect if any does patent protection have on this type of "invention"? Absent a patent, would somebody have done this anyway? You can't crush the inevitable. Second, the question in this context is whether this patent should be entitled to patent protection. Stated another way, is this a patent to an idea or an application of that idea? Is this a special way of allowing users to watch a pre-roll advertisement or is it the idea itself? One deserves patent protection and the other does not.

As strange as this may sound, Judges are supposed to use their experience but not their knowledge. Technically speaking, knowing computer programming may present a bias in this case. Taking an extreme example, a Judge shouldn't precede over a murder trial that he or she witnessed. Here, the Judge is basically saying, "I know difficult code. I have written difficult code. And, this sir, is not difficult code." Since, Oracle's argument depends in-part on the value of this code, the Judge has arguably decided that issue, which may come up if Oracle is not happy. I don't disagree with the Judge, but he is not supposed to be making these kinds of factual findings.

Even in the face of no opposition, a Plaintiff doesn't automatically win. The Plaintiff still has the burden of proving entitlement to a favorable judgment. Unlike a forfeit in sports, you still have to play the game in Court.

At least you can't accuse them of fabricating evidence.

True, but it would have to be a lieutenant that didn't otherwise have access to the information.

Sony wants to sell licenses to use software that happens to be distributed via physical media. In contrast, consumers think of themselves as buying physical media containing software. In other words, consumers believe that any license is attached to the media, whereas Sony wants the license to attach to the person. Because there is no physical media associated with digitally distributed content, consumers don't have any trouble with that concept in that arena. However, in the case of physical media, Sony wants to screw consumers on both sides. If you lose the disc, you can't play the game anymore and if you sell the disc to someone else they can't use it.

If Sony wants to switch to solely licensing software, they should stop selling discs. Otherwise, they should anticipate consumer revolt and rightly so.