Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Preliminary injunction (Score 1) 211

I guess it would take a litigator to notice this, but it's quite unusual that a preliminary injunction denial would be getting this kind of appellate attention.

In the first place, it was unusual for an interlocutory appeal to be granted from the denial of the preliminary injunction motion. In federal court usually you can only appeal from a final judgment.

Similarly, apart from the fact that it's always rare for a certiorari petition to be granted, it's especially tough where the appeal is not from a final judgment, but just from a preliminary injunction denial which does not dispose of the whole case.

Comment That design is crap (Score 1) 172

Sorry, but it's crap:

* Uses plywood instead of wood that's naturally resistant to water and insects, line white pine (pinus strobus)
* That build wastes a huge sheet of wood instead of starting with small pieces. That's a waste
* Need for CNC
* Insanely complex build
* Angled roof, resulting in bad support for the hive
* No room to extend the hive to harvest honey
* No immediately obvious way to access the hive from below
** No way to check on bees to see if they are all right
** No way to deploy stuff that kills varroa destructor

There's a German non-profit called Bienenkiste.de (literally "bee box"). It's a simply, sturdy design that went through over a decade of improvements and incorporates feedback from professionals. Honey yield is 1/2-1/3 of that what the same hive would get with traditional hives, but they are a lot less work and the bees are in a more natural state. This means that the bees are so relaxed, I can do all my work on the hive without smoke or protective equipment.

http://www.bienenkiste.de/doku/bauanleitung/ for instructions. Translate into English, the pictures and videos should be largely self-explanatory.

Submission + - Google Books case dismissed on Fair Use Grounds

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes: In a case of major importance, the long simmering battle between the Authors Guild and Google has reached its climax, with the court granting Google's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the case, on fair use grounds. In his 30-page decision (PDF), Judge Denny Chin — who has been a District Court Judge throughout most of the life of the case but is now a Circuit Court Judge — reasoned that, although Google's own motive for its "Library Project" (which scans books from libraries without the copyright owners' permission and makes the material publicly available for search), is commercial profit, the project itself serves significant educational purposes, and actually enhances, rather than detracts from, the value of the works, since it helps promote sales of the works. Judge Chin also felt that it was impossible to use Google's scanned material, either for making full copies, or for reading the books, so that it did not compete with the books themselves.

Submission + - Aereo required to testify about non-public patent info

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes: In ABC v Aereo, a copyright infringement action against Aereo, the Magistrate Judge has overruled Aereo's attorney/client privilege objection to being forced to divulge non-public details about its patented technology. In his 15 page decision (PDF) he ordered the continued deposition of the company's CTO and CEO about their patent applications. My gut reaction is that this sets a very dangerous precedent, giving the big copyright plaintiffs yet another 'in terrorem' device to use against technology startups — the power to use the lawsuit as a chance to delve into a defendant's non-public tech secrets.

Slashdot Top Deals

"I've seen it. It's rubbish." -- Marvin the Paranoid Android

Working...