[Whatsapp founder] Mr. Koum said that his team was still experimenting with how such services could work, and that many companies were already using the messaging service, particularly in developing countries, to connect with mobile-savvy customers.
If this smells like advertising, Whatsapp vehemently disagrees:
people might wonder how we plan to keep WhatsApp running without subscription fees and if today's announcement means we're introducing third-party ads. The answer is no.
Opensource.com: Is there a practical way for a developer to be sure they're not infringing on a software patent?
There are approximately 400,000 software patents currently in force and about 50,000 new software patents every year. And each of these patents has multiple claims. One paper estimated that if all software firms conducted thorough patent clearance, the annual cost of that process would be greater than the market capitalization of the entire industry.
Firms can do targeted searches to try and minimize risk (looking at the patent portfolio of direct competitors, for example), but they will always be at risk of surprise patent attacks.
lawyers will pass laws restricting that.
They already have. There are lots of rules regarding privacy, billing, and state licensing, which prohibit lawyers from using even the most basic types of technology. Working remotely, accepting payments over the internet, and storing documents on a cloud computers are examples of basic technological steps that face particular hurdles in the legal industry.
So if I sell a drug that doesn't work and I use television to advertise my drug, it's the fault of everyone who advertised my drug?
If the advertisers knew or should have known that the drugs were fake, then yes, it's the advertiser's fault too. Same with Google.
The courts last year said they sort of can (in the 9th District). So in the 9th district Oracle has copyrights (but it's still not their proprietary anything) and in the other districts nothing.
It was the Federal Circuit's decision, not the Ninth Circuit. While not binding on other circuits, the Federal Circuit is extremely influential.
Could someone explain the summary in plain English?
Techdirt's heart may be in the right place, but they are pretty infamous for putting out incomprehensible garbage on intellectual property issues.
[Uber's] founding members can't wait until the day Uber becomes a fully autonomous moneymaking machine and they can live a life of endless hedonism on the Bahamas
I think the founders are already well rich enough to do that, especially in the Bahamas.
You can buy Composition Notebooks by the gross, those are very popular around here. Plus they offer the integrity of not being able to remove pages if that's your cup of tea.
I heard they're incompatible with the upcoming version of Windows.
fair use relates to copyright, so the court almost certainly didn't rule it was fair use
There is fair use in trademark too. Here's the quote from the judge (page 35):
After weighing the evidence presented at trial and considering the arguments made by the parties, the Court concludes that Pintrips satisfies the first two elements of the fair use analysis in that it uses the term pin “otherwise than as a mark” and “only to describe [its] goods or services.” 15 U.S.C. 1115(b)(4).
When in doubt, mumble; when in trouble, delegate; when in charge, ponder. -- James H. Boren