Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.vms > #58494 > unrolled thread

HTTP/2 stole my Applet

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.vms

Contents

  HTTP/2 stole my Applet Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-17 16:56 +0800
    Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG - 2016-06-17 10:58 +0000
      Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet Richard Maher <maherrj@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 18:01 +0800
        Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de (Phillip Helbig (undress to reply)) - 2016-06-20 19:28 +0000
        Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet Qu0ll <qu0ll64@gmail.com> - 2016-06-21 17:39 +1000
          Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-06-22 03:25 -0700
            Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet "Craig A. Berry" <craigberry@nospam.mac.com> - 2016-06-22 07:22 -0500
            Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de (Phillip Helbig (undress to reply)) - 2016-06-22 21:21 +0000
              Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-06-22 14:51 -0700
            Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> - 2016-06-22 20:05 -0400
        Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet Richard Maher <maherrj@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 13:22 +0800
          Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet   VAXman-  @SendSpamHere.ORG - 2016-06-22 12:39 +0000
    Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet Qu0ll <qu0ll64@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 03:36 +1000
    Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-06-17 23:16 +0200
    Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-06-17 17:24 -0700
      Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2016-06-18 15:21 +0000
        Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-06-18 16:35 -0700
          Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> - 2016-06-18 22:59 -0400
            Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-06-18 21:42 -0700
              Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> - 2016-06-19 01:35 -0400
                Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2016-06-19 09:00 +0200
                  Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-06-19 00:32 -0700
                    Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> - 2016-06-19 23:37 -0400
                      Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-06-22 03:22 -0700
                        Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet David Froble <davef@tsoft-inc.com> - 2016-06-22 16:29 -0400
                Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-06-19 00:33 -0700
                  Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet Bill Gunshannon <bill.gunshannon@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 16:06 -0400
                    Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet lawrencedo99@gmail.com - 2016-06-22 03:21 -0700
            Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet Bill Gunshannon <bill.gunshannon@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 15:59 -0400
          Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet Bill Gunshannon <bill.gunshannon@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 15:57 -0400
        Re: HTTP/2 stole my Applet Bill Gunshannon <bill.gunshannon@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 15:56 -0400
    The smoking gun Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-23 20:20 +0800

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#58494 — HTTP/2 stole my Applet

For those of you who've been following on along at home all these years, 
and may have a passing interest in what I was talking about, you can 
find the source-code for my Applet at 
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B7Rmd3Rn8_hDY0RkbWwtVV9DdDg&usp=sharing 


For those of you who are new, my Applet facilitated the following 
UA/Browser<->Application Server functionality: -

- Single-Signon without session-hijackable cookie bollocks?

- Single, persistent network connection across multiple active tabs in a

browser instance?

- Full-on synchronous of asynchronous I/O capability?

- 1:M relationship between messages sent to received?

- Retention of server-affinity if/when needed?

- Run-time discovery of Application Servers

- Takes up 0px by 0px GUI real estate

- Dependency injection on the Handshake/authentication logic

- and much much more . . .

Anyway, I may be the last person on the planet to admit Applets are dead 
but I'm sure I'm not the only one who shed a tear at their passing.

For the Javascript people this is how Tier3Client was instantiated: -

       try {
         t3Client = new Tier3Client(
                        "Demo", "http://192.168.1.159/Applets/",
                        2048, 1022, kickOff, epicFail, "ISO-8859-1", 
"N", Tier3Client.GUIAWT,
                        null,Tier3Client.WARNING);
       } catch (err){
             alert((err.description||err.message));
         throw err;
       }

This example can be found in Randomator.html and the object code can be 
found in Tier3Client.js.

Cheers Richard Maher

PS. If anyone knows a half decent lawyer who operates on contingency 
fees please send him my way. HTTP/2 has a lot more than persistent, 
multiplexed, TCP/IP connections but I can tell you that that the 
similarity of algorithms involved is far greater and more substantial 
than the first few bars of "Stairway to Heaven"!

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36546726

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#58498

In article <nk0e09$1a68$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> writes:
>For those of you who've been following on along at home all these years, 
>and may have a passing interest in what I was talking about, you can 
>find the source-code for my Applet at 
>https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B7Rmd3Rn8_hDY0RkbWwtVV9DdDg&usp=sharing 
>
>
>For those of you who are new, my Applet facilitated the following 
>UA/Browser<->Application Server functionality: -
>
>- Single-Signon without session-hijackable cookie bollocks?
>
>- Single, persistent network connection across multiple active tabs in a
>
>browser instance?
>
>- Full-on synchronous of asynchronous I/O capability?
>
>- 1:M relationship between messages sent to received?
>
>- Retention of server-affinity if/when needed?
>
>- Run-time discovery of Application Servers
>
>- Takes up 0px by 0px GUI real estate
>
>- Dependency injection on the Handshake/authentication logic
>
>- and much much more . . .
>
>Anyway, I may be the last person on the planet to admit Applets are dead 
>but I'm sure I'm not the only one who shed a tear at their passing.
>
>For the Javascript people this is how Tier3Client was instantiated: -
>
>       try {
>         t3Client = new Tier3Client(
>                        "Demo", "http://192.168.1.159/Applets/",
>                        2048, 1022, kickOff, epicFail, "ISO-8859-1", 
>"N", Tier3Client.GUIAWT,
>                        null,Tier3Client.WARNING);
>       } catch (err){
>             alert((err.description||err.message));
>         throw err;
>       }
>
>This example can be found in Randomator.html and the object code can be 
>found in Tier3Client.js.
>
>Cheers Richard Maher
>
>PS. If anyone knows a half decent lawyer who operates on contingency 
>fees please send him my way. HTTP/2 has a lot more than persistent, 
>multiplexed, TCP/IP connections but I can tell you that that the 
>similarity of algorithms involved is far greater and more substantial 
>than the first few bars of "Stairway to Heaven"!
>
>http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36546726

Trying to turn this into a Spirit-ed debate, RIchard?

-- 
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker    VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58652

On 17-Jun-16 6:58 PM, VAXman-@SendSpamHere.ORG wrote:
 > In article <nk0e09$1a68$1@gioia.aioe.org>,
Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> writes:
 >> For those of you who've been following on
 >> along at home all these years,and may have a passing
 >> interest in what I was talking about, you can find the
 >> source-code for my Applet at
 >> https://drive.google.com/folderview?
id=0B7Rmd3Rn8_hDY0RkbWwtVV9DdDg&usp=sharing
 >>
 >>
 >> For those of you who are new, my Applet facilitated the following
 >> UA/Browser<->Application Server functionality: -
 >>
 >> - Single-Signon without session-hijackable cookie bollocks?
 >>
 >> - Single, persistent network connection across multiple active
 >>
 >> tabs in a browser instance?
 >>
 >> - Full-on synchronous of asynchronous I/O capability?
 >>
 >> - 1:M relationship between messages sent to received?
 >>
 >> - Retention of server-affinity if/when needed?
 >>
 >> - Run-time discovery of Application Servers
 >>
 >> - Takes up 0px by 0px GUI real estate
 >>
 >> - Dependency injection on the Handshake/authentication logic
 >>
 >> - and much much more . . .
 >>
 >> Anyway, I may be the last person on the planet to admit Applets
 >> are dead
 >> but I'm sure I'm not the only one who shed a tear at their passing.
 >>
 >> For the Javascript people this is how Tier3Client was instantiated: -
 >>
 >>       try {
 >>         t3Client = new Tier3Client(
 >>                        "Demo", "http://192.168.1.159/Applets/",
 >>                        2048, 1022, kickOff, epicFail, "ISO-8859-1",
 >> "N", Tier3Client.GUIAWT,
 >>                        null,Tier3Client.WARNING);
 >>       } catch (err){
 >>             alert((err.description||err.message));
 >>         throw err;
 >>       }
 >>
 >> This example can be found in Randomator.html and the object code
 >> can be
 >> found in Tier3Client.js.
 >>
 >> Cheers Richard Maher
 >>
 >> PS. If anyone knows a half decent lawyer who operates on contingency
 >> fees please send him my way. HTTP/2 has a lot more than persistent,
 >> multiplexed, TCP/IP connections but I can tell you that that the
 >> similarity of algorithms involved is far greater and more substantial
 >> than the first few bars of "Stairway to Heaven"!
 >>
 >> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36546726
 >
 > Trying to turn this into a Spirit-ed debate, RIchard?
 >

You're just about old enough to have covered those gigs aren't you Brian 
:-) Or was the pony-tail a bit avant garde even for the 60s?
Perhaps you'll have to submit your BoxBrownie as evidence?

Anyway Led Zeppelin are heading for a fall and with over $550million
in revenue to date, it's going to cost 'em big time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXMYb93EW2s

If you think the case is ridiculous and doesn't have a hope of getting 
up just look to the precedence of Men at Work "The land down under"
http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/music
/men-at-works-colin-hay-says-down-under-lawsuit-contributed-to-death-of-
his-dad-and-bandmate/news-story/db47d17797386c960b7a7737974ea1ce

I doubt many who didn't attend primary school in Oz know "kookaburra 
sits in the old gum tree" but the similarity with the flute-break is 
uncanny. Well, the judge thought so.

Is all of this happening because people/companies/trusts are just 
feeding a few bars at a time into Google and seeing what it guesses?

I'm happy that all plagiarizing bastards get their comeuppance! The 
corridors
of W3C and IETF are so stacked with left-wing ideologues and sycophants
prostrating themselves before the scribes and pharisees that original 
thought
simply has to be sourced elsewhere :-( How many of them have actually 
cut-code
for a living? Having said that this particular gripe is with Google and 
the authors of SPDY.

Anyway I'd like to thank Arne for all his help in developing the killer
architecture for the Web that sadly came after its time. I owe you a cut 
of everything I made from it.

Feel free to collect your beer anytime :-)

Cheers Richard Maher

PS. Good defense: "If anyone can remember who was at those gigs,
the line-up, or what was played, then they simply weren't there".

PPS. Did no one pause to look at my code and be dumbstruck by its
sheer beauty long enough to stroke my ego?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58682

In article <nk8etu$9u5$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Richard Maher
<maherrj@gmail.com> writes: 

> Anyway Led Zeppelin are heading for a fall and with over $550million
> in revenue to date, it's going to cost 'em big time.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXMYb93EW2s

There are many similar cases, e.g. George Harrison's "My Sweet Lord" and
The Chiffons' "He's So Fine".  There is Jethro Tull's "We Used to Know"
and The Eagles' "Hotel California".  (Ian Anderson jokes about the
similarity, especially since the Eagles supported Tull not long before
the song was written, but he overlooks the fact that Don Felder wrote
the music, who was not then in The Eagles.  Sure, it could still be
plagiarism, intentional or not, but the fact that The Eagles supported
Tull is then irrelevant.)  Usually, these are
unintentional---coincidence, both (unconsciously) based on some unknown 
tune, or perhaps one is based on the other, but there is no intentional 
plagiarism.

But Led Zeppelin have a LONG history of out-and-out plagiarism, and have
been sued (and lost) many times, so it wouldn't surprise me here.  
Having said that, the two songs are not THAT similar.

> If you think the case is ridiculous and doesn't have a hope of getting 
> up just look to the precedence of Men at Work "The land down under"
> http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/music
> /men-at-works-colin-hay-says-down-under-lawsuit-contributed-to-death-of-
> his-dad-and-bandmate/news-story/db47d17797386c960b7a7737974ea1ce
> 
> I doubt many who didn't attend primary school in Oz know "kookaburra 
> sits in the old gum tree" but the similarity with the flute-break is 
> uncanny. Well, the judge thought so.

I know the song.  It's not that obscure.  I'm sure everyone in Oz has 
heard it.

> Is all of this happening because people/companies/trusts are just 
> feeding a few bars at a time into Google and seeing what it guesses?

No.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58699

On 20/06/2016 20:01, Richard Maher wrote:

[snip]

>> Trying to turn this into a Spirit-ed debate, RIchard?

> Anyway Led Zeppelin are heading for a fall and with over $550million
> in revenue to date, it's going to cost 'em big time.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXMYb93EW2s

Well, as a composer myself, I find all these lawsuits rather pointless, 
tedious and (mostly) entirely unwarranted.

In this case, the lineage of the opening chord progression in "Stairway 
to Heaven" could arguably be quite possibly linked to the composer of 
the other progression in question here. But, even if Plant/Page used it 
as a form of "inspiration", their "version" is (in my mind) sufficiently 
different (and actually) better than that from which it was supposedly 
copied to be far out of the reach of greedy litigious morons.

Now, if you take these lawsuits to the ridiculous and yet obvious 
conclusion, imagine how many TENS OF THOUSANDS of such claims would be 
being made by whoever the original composer of the classic 12-bar-blues 
progression was.  Let's face it, it was used in the vast majority of pop 
hits from the 50s and 60s and is STILL being copied chord-for-chord to 
this very day.

Even the incredibly talented and extremely creative and original 
phenomenon that was The Beatles used it a couple of times themselves 
(albeit rather cleverly, as you would expect). The verses of "Can't Buy 
Me Love" are just one such example.

Yet how many people have been sued for using this cliched progression? 
Well, none that I am aware of. But hey, whoever owns the rights to the 
original song could step up right now and become an instant trillionaire!

Really, the day that anyone composes something truly "original" in 
either the pop or rock music genres, I will eat my three day old socks.

Even Gaga *admitted* that "Born This Way" was a *direct copy* of the 
chords used in Madonna's hit "Express Yourself".  Has she been sued??? 
No. She justified it by saying "They were great chords, it was just time 
they got a slightly different melody and new lyrics".

> If you think the case is ridiculous and doesn't have a hope of getting
> up just look to the precedence of Men at Work "The land down under"
> http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/music
> /men-at-works-colin-hay-says-down-under-lawsuit-contributed-to-death-of-
> his-dad-and-bandmate/news-story/db47d17797386c960b7a7737974ea1ce
>
> I doubt many who didn't attend primary school in Oz know "kookaburra
> sits in the old gum tree" but the similarity with the flute-break is
> uncanny. Well, the judge thought so.

This is perhaps the most ludicrous of the entire bunch.

For a start, no one even *knew* that "Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum 
Tree" was anything other than just a public-domain "folk/cultural" song 
and I can assure you that Men at Work had absolutely no idea that there 
was any possibility of it being "copyrighted" or protected in some way.

And, I can also absolutely assure you that they did not in *any way* 
even use this classic Aussie tune as either a basis for the flute break, 
an inspiration for it or were even thinking about it AT ALL when they 
wrote "Down Under".  The musical differences are so striking that it 
utterly defies logic to actually even permit the litigation to proceed 
(let alone succeed), and, to even lead to the tragic death of a band member.

> PPS. Did no one pause to look at my code and be dumbstruck by its
> sheer beauty long enough to stroke my ego?

I would have - but I wasn't aware your ego needed any "stroking"...

-- 

And loving it,

-Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct)
_________________________________________________
Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com
[Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58755

On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 7:39:22 PM UTC+12, Qu0ll wrote:

> Well, as a composer myself, I find all these lawsuits rather pointless, 
> tedious and (mostly) entirely unwarranted.

Copyright law was not created to help out struggling artists, but to entrench the power of the publishers and distributors (and collection societies). Successful, established artists also find it a useful weapon against the upstart competition.

As I like to keep pointing out, if William Shakespeare were to try to make a living today, he would be sued into penury. There was no copyright in his day; he lifted plots and characters wholesale from others, and others copied from him. Yet he still was successful enough to provide for two wives in his will.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58759

On 6/22/16 5:25 AM, lawrencedo99@gmail.com wrote:

> As I like to keep pointing out, if William Shakespeare were to try to
> make a living today, he would be sued into penury. There was no
> copyright in his day; he lifted plots and characters wholesale from
> others, and others copied from him.

That's more or less plausible. There were laws governing publication
(which Shakespeare never did) and performance, but not copyright as such.

 > Yet he still was successful
> enough to provide for two wives in his will.

He famously left his "second best bed" to his wife, but there was no
mention of a second wife.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58793

In article <e0b443f6-1a35-4161-b221-2af058c2a4bc@googlegroups.com>,
lawrencedo99@gmail.com writes: 

> Copyright law was not created to help out struggling artists, but to 
> entrench the power of the publishers and distributors 

Perhaps to some extent, but it is a fact that without it, struggling 
artists have almost no chance of making a living, so it does help them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58797

On Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 9:21:59 AM UTC+12, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
> In article <e0b443f6-1a35-4161-b221-2af058c2a4bc@googlegroups.com>,
> Lawrence D’Oliveiro writes: 
> 
> > Copyright law was not created to help out struggling artists, but to 
> > entrench the power of the publishers and distributors 
> 
> Perhaps to some extent, but it is a fact that without it, struggling 
> artists have almost no chance of making a living, so it does help them.

Realistically, struggling artists have never been able to afford the legal fees it would take to exploit copyright law for their own benefit. Too often, the law is used as a weapon against them <https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160616/10483534726/appeals-court-gives-big-loss-to-record-labels-their-quixotic-lawsuit-against-vimeo-lipdubs.shtml>, <https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160613/01084434693/pure-bullshit-amc-threatens-huge-fan-community-with-copyright-claim-over-spoiler-predictions.shtml>, <https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160608/08084334657/canada-post-drops-ridiculous-copyright-lawsuit-over-crowdsourced-postal-code.shtml>.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58805

lawrencedo99@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 7:39:22 PM UTC+12, Qu0ll wrote:
> 
>> Well, as a composer myself, I find all these lawsuits rather pointless, 
>> tedious and (mostly) entirely unwarranted.
> 
> Copyright law was not created to help out struggling artists, but to entrench the power of the publishers and distributors (and collection societies). Successful, established artists also find it a useful weapon against the upstart competition.

I seem to recall that in the past the publishers and distributors appeared to 
feel they ran the entire planet.  Specifically, they felt threatened by 
recordable 4 MM DAT, CDs, DVD, and such, and attempted to get legislation to 
outlaw such devices.

Well, the music world isn't everything.  (Several of them just had a heart 
attack.)  The IT world needed the recordable devices.  The assholes didn't care. 
  There got that off my back.  I'll also say that the internet is giving them 
all that they deserve for their attitudes, and that gives me a smile.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58744

On 20/06/2016 6:01 PM, Richard Maher wrote:
>
> PS. Good defense: "If anyone can remember who was at those gigs,
> the line-up, or what was played, then they simply weren't there".

Now they've stolen my defense strategy :-(
http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-36592517

>
> PPS. Did no one pause to look at my code and be dumbstruck by its
> sheer beauty long enough to stroke my ego?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58761

In article <nkd7a4$18ap$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Richard Maher <maherrj@gmail.com> writes:
>On 20/06/2016 6:01 PM, Richard Maher wrote:
>>
>> PS. Good defense: "If anyone can remember who was at those gigs,
>> the line-up, or what was played, then they simply weren't there".
>
>Now they've stolen my defense strategy :-(
>http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-36592517

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlKyWKODn_4



>>
>> PPS. Did no one pause to look at my code and be dumbstruck by its
>> sheer beauty long enough to stroke my ego?
>

Now I'll have to do back to your initial post and have a look.

-- 
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker    VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG

I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58511

On 17/06/2016 18:56, Richard Maher wrote:

> For those of you who've been following on along at home all these years

Yes, I am one of those (unfortunately).

> and may have a passing interest in what I was talking about

No, I am not one of those (fortunately).

> Anyway, I may be the last person on the planet to admit Applets are dead

Correct.

> but I'm sure I'm not the only one who shed a tear at their passing.

Incorrect.

> PS. If anyone knows a half decent lawyer who operates on contingency
> fees please send him my way. HTTP/2 has a lot more than persistent,
> multiplexed, TCP/IP connections but I can tell you that that the
> similarity of algorithms involved is far greater and more substantial
> than the first few bars of "Stairway to Heaven"!

Yeah right, just like Dalvik resembles Java...

-- 

And loving it,

-Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct)
_________________________________________________
Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com
[Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58515

Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> whined across 3 newsgroups:

> […]

*PLONK*

F'up2 poster

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58521

On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 8:56:44 PM UTC+12, Richard Maher wrote:

> PS. If anyone knows a half decent lawyer who operates on contingency 
> fees please send him my way. HTTP/2 has a lot more than persistent, 
> multiplexed, TCP/IP connections but I can tell you that that the 
> similarity of algorithms involved is far greater and more substantial 
> than the first few bars of "Stairway to Heaven"!

Can you own an idea?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58545

On 2016-06-18, lawrencedo99@gmail.com <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Can you own an idea?

Yes. Copyights protect an implementation of an idea; a patent protects
the idea itself.

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58557

On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 3:21:36 AM UTC+12, Simon Clubley wrote:
>
> On 2016-06-18, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>
>>
>> Can you own an idea?
> 
> Yes. Copyights protect an implementation of an idea; a patent protects
> the idea itself.

If someone came up with the same idea before you, that can invalidate your patent (“prior art”).

But if they came up with the same idea *after* you, they cannot claim independent invention as a defence against infringement. Why is that?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58572

lawrencedo99@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 3:21:36 AM UTC+12, Simon Clubley wrote:
>> On 2016-06-18, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> Can you own an idea?
>> Yes. Copyights protect an implementation of an idea; a patent protects
>> the idea itself.
> 
> If someone came up with the same idea before you, that can invalidate your patent (“prior art”).
> 
> But if they came up with the same idea *after* you, they cannot claim independent invention as a defence against infringement. Why is that?

If they could, then what is the use of copyrights and patents.  Well, Ok, 
patents.  It's not independent if copywrited material is copied.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58580

On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 2:59:13 PM UTC+12, David Froble wrote:
> Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 3:21:36 AM UTC+12, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>> On 2016-06-18, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> Can you own an idea?
>>> Yes. Copyights protect an implementation of an idea; a patent protects
>>> the idea itself.
>> 
>> If someone came up with the same idea before you, that can invalidate your
>> patent (“prior art”).
>> 
>> But if they came up with the same idea *after* you, they cannot claim
>> independent invention as a defence against infringement. Why is that?
> 
> If they could, then what is the use of copyrights and patents.  Well, Ok, 
> patents.  It's not independent if copywrited material is copied.

Why?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#58584

lawrencedo99@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 2:59:13 PM UTC+12, David Froble wrote:
>> Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 3:21:36 AM UTC+12, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>> On 2016-06-18, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Can you own an idea?
>>>> Yes. Copyights protect an implementation of an idea; a patent protects
>>>> the idea itself.
>>> If someone came up with the same idea before you, that can invalidate your
>>> patent (“prior art”).
>>>
>>> But if they came up with the same idea *after* you, they cannot claim
>>> independent invention as a defence against infringement. Why is that?
>> If they could, then what is the use of copyrights and patents.  Well, Ok, 
>> patents.  It's not independent if copywrited material is copied.
> 
> Why?

I'm assuming that you're asking why a patent protects an idea?

So, you come up with a better mousetrap, and you get a patent.  You may want to 
produce and sell the better mousetrap.  So you incur considerable expense 
setting up production.  If anybody could then copy your better mousetrap, and 
undercut your price, then you are going to lose the investment.

Would we have innovators, if they knew someone would just steal their ideas?

Sort of like China, huh?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.vms

csiph-web