Almost every single taxpayer-funded public university in the entire country claims IP ownership of everything the students do that is accomplished using any campus resources, including dorms, computers, networks, telephone systems, libraries, professors, and other students.

In fact, at my alma mater, a waiver of rights and assignment of intellectual property contract is included IN THE APPLICATION for admission. By simply applying, you are agreeing to assign to them all creative works and inventions you might dream up from the date you matriculate until the date you graduate.

Copyright it yourself before you turn it in, then sue them for copyright infringement.

Typing too fast late at night...

Yes, 15.201(b) requires all intentional radiators not exempted by 15.23(a) to be certified pursuant to 2.901 and forward.

It does not matter whether the user actually transmits. It is being marketed as a device capable of transmitting, and therefore it must be type accepted by the FCC (and before it is marketed for sale).

If it is incapable of transmitting, then it is incumbent upon the seller to at least include a statement of compliance saying that the device has been tested to comply with Part 15 rules for incidental radiators.

Mod parent up, please.

Have you obtained FCC type acceptance pursuant to Part 15, Subpart J of the Rules?

That is correct. US Law requires anyone marketing an intentional radiator obtain FCC equipment authorization under Part 15, Subpart J of "the Rules," _before_ the device is marketed for sale.

There is an exception in 15.23 for home-built devices, but this project does not quality, as the exception in 15.23 only applies to home-built devices, and not those that are purchased in kit form.

Seems to me that cheating would be a requirement to pass that course.

Here's a video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpkTHyfr0pM

(seriously, watch the series. It's pretty amazing)

No, he only licensed it.

"The exclusive right to control distribution of a copy is exhausted on it's first sale."

The software is not being sold. It is being licensed. The doctrine of first sale only applies when something is sold.

I believe the court erred in this case, and grievously, since it made clear the fact that it does not understand the difference between licensing and selling.

11" Schmidt-Cassegrain with various CCD cameras.

... on a Computer. ... on a Phone.

Gee, it must be some new mystical technology to deploy a sliding door lock on a computer or phone.

The White House doesn't make law, and does not control the Library of Congress.

Petition Congress, not the White House.

Perhaps it's not as big a problem as you think.

I live on a man-made lake system with a nuclear reactor, where the upper two lakes are used basically as giant batteries. During the night when the nuclear station is producing excess power, that power is used to pump water from the lower lakes into the upper lakes. During the day when demand is high, water is allowed to flow back downhill through the hydro plants, producing the excess power needed to meet demand.

I see no reason we can't deploy similar technology today, using renewables to pump water uphill during the feast, and then using that stored energy when there is famine.