But that doesn't make him a patent troll.
But that doesn't make him a patent troll.
I agree. Even if the patent is invalidated, it does not make the wannabe patent holder into a troll. I think people are seriously misusing that term in their haste to label everyone a troll. A patent troll should be a set of lawyers attempting to extract license fees from a patent or invention they did not originally create, or an attempt to extort license fees through fear of litigation. However someone who did the work (or thought he did) and created the patent and is attempting to make money from that work should not be considered a troll even if the patents end up being nullified.
Basically there are several issues that need fixing with the patent system, and they shouldn't all be lumped together into a single "troll" category.
What if you used the object internally when designing the 3D printer? Ie, it's your basic test case, if you can't print that object and have it look nice then the printer isn't good enough. The end result is you get a better printer than the competition. Thus a "commercial advantage".
I agree, the 3D printer part is a red herring. There's nothing even remotely new here. May as well talk about hammer and chisel and a block of marble.
However what may be confusing is what it means to be licensed for "no commercial advantage". Selling copies of the object would be right out, but would just displaying the object as an example of what could be made with a commercial product count as commercial advantage? Could you include a picture of the object in an advertisement for a chisel? Of course it may seem perfectly clear to some non-lawyers but would this really hold up in court? What if I printed the object for my private use but then I died and someone inherited that piece of art, could they then display it in their store window to attract customers?
(On the other hand, it is a bit odd for the artist who freely shares non-commercially goes and removes all designs from a 3d printing sight just because someone used it commercially; this seems the opposite of sharing. It seems the artist gives less priority to the thousands of users using the object appropriately than the one user who did it incorrectly.
Except that Agile comes with it's own terminology and rituals. Like a religion in some ways. It also comes with a large industry of consultants and coaches and participants and advocates.
Most companies out there don't use any specific methodology, they just have a mishmash of lots of things. There absolutely is not a binary choice of agile versus waterfall.
I don't agree with this view. Copyright has always been about being able to copy, not about controlling what happens with the copy. It is a very radical departure to grant control of how copies are used to the copyright holder. If I want control then I need a separate and distinct contract and the terms must be spelled out in advance.
Ie, if I sell you a piece of software, then you can use it in ways that I do not approve of (stick it in a smart bomb). Of course software usually does come with restrictions but these come as separate side agreements (EULAs, or actual contracts).
In particular once the copy is out of my hands I can not change my mind. If I sell a million copies of my song on a record then I have no legal ability to recall those records if I later find out it has become a popular with white supremacists. The record once sold is out of my control. I am also unable to prevent owners of the record from playing it to a small group of family or friends. This is why companies want DRM, so that they can change the terms of licenses after the fact, or bypass fair use clauses, and in general maintain a level of control that copyright does not grant.
Hackable, if you have access to the hardware. Ie, cracking the case open and drilling out epoxy. Now maybe there's a bug in the UEFI that lets you bypass it purely from software but it seems unlikely if they did it right. Ie, the thing most likely boots to a section of Flash that is write protected in hardware and you need access to that write protect pin before you can change that.
Best bet might be to get a signed secondary boot loader in place.
Problem is you may not be able to bypass the secure loader. Look at the tear downs for the normal RT and it looks like you're not really going to get easy access to the roms. None of these tablets are designed to be repaired or modified, ever.
But can you keep it down after you finish it?
We'll also have fully documented, with evidence, 20 competing accounts of every historical event.
If you look at all the chromosomes though, there are a lot of "runts". The size of the chromosome doesn't matter as long as they can hold a few genes that are vital.
Well in the workplace there are lots of people who will say "they say that's bad for you" but never once define who "they" are. This sort of common knowledge spreads around without being verified.
News media do have a clue about what makes a good headline. They're not going after the truth or trying to educate the public or even trying to disseminate important information. They just want readers and viewers. The internet isn't helping either since there are even more faux journalists there.
The glass is thicker in the middle when it's first made. The molten glass is spun to flatten it, so it's thinner at edges and thicker in the middle. It is then cut into small panes and pieces. Thus the slightly thick part is at one end. The effect was noticed on normal panes.
It's also known as being a human being. Moments of genius interspersed with moments of stupidity, and a whole lot in between.
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law. -- Roy Santoro