Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Evil Designers Guide to Copying Patents

M

MassiveProng

This post made me wonder, "WTF CORDIC?", so I asked google. The
first hit was pretty cool - I especially like item 1.1:
http://www.dspguru.com/info/faqs/cordic.htm

Cheers!
Rich


Looks to me like it is public domain.

Sort of like the details of the cocroft-walton voltage multiplier for
a similar example..
Someone's name is on it, but the design is most assuredly public
domain.
 
H

Homer J Simpson

That gives me an idea for a new television show.. Take Miami Vice but
instead of cops have electronics engineers as the main
characters..They investigate copied IP..
Or rip the tv show CSI...and call it IPI...Intellectual Property
Investigation.
Throw in car chases, fights, explosions, endless drama and the show
may survive a first season. :)
D from BC

http://finance.sympatico.msn.ca/taxes/insight/article.aspx?cp-documentid=4373245

Tax havens of the world

Matt Woolsey and Elisabeth Eaves, Forbes.com
March 16, 2007

Death may be certain, but taxes don't have to be.

It's an international marketplace after all, and there are plenty of nations
willing to welcome expatriates fed up with the taxman.
Countries like the Bahamas make tax haven status an integral part of their
marketing - relocate to Nassau, and you'll fear no tax man. That's because,
for Bahamians and resident aliens there are no taxes on personal income,
capital gains, inheritance or gifts.
"The policy benefits the Bahamas indirectly," says Terrance Bain of FT
Consultants, an accounting and tax planning firm in the Bahamas. "A person
coming to the Bahamas will buy real estate or operate some kind of business.
Most luxury properties are marketed to and eventually bought by
non-Bahamians - it's a very robust market."
Good weather and no audits, it's almost unfair.

The history
Tax havens grew out of the late 19th-century British system that began
granting independent economic governance to protectorates like Gibraltar,
Hong Kong or the Channel Islands, which then became easy places for people
to protect money - hence the term off-shore accounts.
By the 20th century, high net-worth individuals were flocking to small
islands like Monaco and Bermuda, whose governments figured the money they
could garnish off real estate transactions and sales tax made the tax-free
incentives worthwhile.
"Monaco is a luxury destination," says Maguy Maccario-Doyle, consul general
to the United States. "It is a soft tax system, but we do have a value added
tax around 30% on luxury items such as jewelry or restaurants and all the
best luxury people are here within a square mile."
And it works. Six of the Forbes Billionaires reside in Monaco, making one in
every 5,400 residents worth over a billion dollars. The principality's
housing market commands a median price of US$3,000 dollars per square foot,
ahead of Manhattan and London, according to international real estate
analysts Global Property Guide.

Bermuda, though it has only three billionaires, has the highest gross
domestic product per capita in the world at US$70,000 per citizen. Hiding
out in Bermuda is so popular, in fact, that the government makes it
virtually impossible to get permanent residency, and requires that
foreigners buying into the market pay a minimum of US$1 million for their
home and then a 22% transfer fee to the government.
Those may be luxury prices, but it's a small price to pay for the tax
breaks. Non-profit group Tax Justice Network estimates that offshore tax
havens shielded over US$255 billion in global tax revenue in 2006, a number
roughly equal to a third of India's overall GDP.

The catch
Most countries assess taxes based on residency, not citizenship. As a
result, people across Europe who settle down in Switzerland ease into the
moderate tax rates. For Americans, however, there's no escaping the long arm
of the IRS.
Americans living outside the country are exempt on their first US$82,400 of
foreign earned income, but the most recent 2006 tax cuts boosted taxes by up
to 20% for expatriates and made it possible for the IRS to dip into foreign
retirement accounts for the first time. It is the highest such increase in
30 years, and ex-pats pay it on top of their host country taxes.
For Americans abroad, the only way to fully take advantage of tax havens is
to renounce American citizenship, which over 500 people, almost all of very
high net worth, did last year.
Soaking in the sun, watching the Monaco Grand Prix and doing your best Grace
Kelly impression makes for easy living, but comes at a cost. For most it's
difficult to imagine relinquishing a U.S. passport, and that's why some
states offer significant tax relief.
Nevada is the closest thing the U.S. has to a tax haven. No personal income
tax, no capital gains tax, no gift tax, no inheritance tax, no franchise
tax, no inventory tax.
"We do have a property tax," says Shari Chase of Chase International, a real
estate brokerage in Lake Tahoe, Nev. "But compared to the rest of the
country, and our neighbors in California, the property tax is extremely
low - and properties are not reassessed upon purchase."
It's no wonder, then, that the US$100 million Lake Tahoe Tranquility mansion
found itself on the Nevada side of the border.
Avoiding taxes in other states isn't as simple as scooping up a place in
Nevada and claiming residency. Other states levy taxes for income made on
their soil, so retired persons have long been the main benefactors of the
state's tax structure, but that may be changing.

Living the luxe life
But should you choose to relocate to one of the world's tax havens, what can
you expect?
Even when relocating to paradise, moving abroad can be a tough adjustment.
But it can also offer opportunities for you and your family to explore local
culture or take up new hobbies.
Cities like Hong Kong and Geneva offer as many cosmopolitan amenities as you
can expect to find anywhere, with many of the comforts of home, from cinemas
showing American movies to top-notch international cuisine.
Moving to a small island, though, can make it harder to import your
lifestyle - but fortunately the way of life most offer is alluring. Bermuda,
for example, has nine golf courses crammed into just 20.6 square miles and
temperatures that seldom fall below 60 degrees (16 celsius) or rise above 85
(29 celsius), meaning that it's a rare day you can't play. In the British
Virgin Islands, it would be a sin not to work on your skippering skills,
while a move to the Cayman Islands virtually requires an interest in
snorkeling or scuba diving.
Monaco and Gibraltar are among our most miniscule tax havens, but there's no
need to feel confined. If you tire of the gambling, sunbathing and
nightclubbing to be had in Monaco itself - which may take a while - the
French Riviera is just a short convertible drive away. From Gibraltar, visit
Spanish beaches or the Moorish architecture of Andalusia.
That is if you're not glued to your computer. It takes work to make all that
tax-free money, after all.
"With the onset of the internet - doing business like we do business today -
someone can live in a fabulous home here in Lake Tahoe," says Chase, "and do
business around the world."
 
J

jasen

So if RevEng's are slicing through epoxy...
Maybe their exists another anti-copy encapsulent..

maybe epoxy with diamonds?
it'd be like waving a red flag...
(Or a anti-"I don't want you to know I ripped a patent" encapsulent)
How about an acid blister? Burns the electronics if it's broken?
D from BC

Bye.
Jasen
 
J

jasen

It happens.

Another place that patents are vulnerable is covering processes or
algorithms. If the delivered article doesn't actually contain the code
(object or source), how would an examination reveal an infringement?

A hypothetical example: If someone were to duplicate Google's search
algorithms, but move their servers to a jurisdiction which doesn't honor
US subpoenas, how could Google ever establish that the competitor had
infringed rather than come up with a unique algorithm of their own? The
delivered product contains no direct evidence of the process used to
generate it.

how does a college examiner detect copied answers.
 
C

Chris Jones

D said:
I'm going to tick off some patent owners. :p

1) Patent owners are not god and see everything everywhere.
Play the odds...There's a good chance of never being discovered.
2) Some copied tech can be epoxy encapsulated. Is a patent owner
going to spend days picking away at epoxy to see if it's a copy?
Maybe filing off chip numbers will help.
3) Deny copying the patent.. I didn't make that! :)
Be a non-existent, unregistered, unlicensed company.
4) Find out if the patent owner is poor.. Most likely the person is
too broke for a patent legal battle.
5) Avoid mass production of the copied patent.
6) Have the copied patent made overseas. Have it disguised as another
product when it's imported.
7) Maybe improve or degrade the patent so that's it's different.
8) Don't release schematics. Maybe have fake schematics too.
9) If you're not making much money on the copied patent.. You think
you'll get sued over a few hundred dollars of profit?
10) Go ahead copy away..When discovered, perhaps make a deal with the
patent owner for licensing and paying back royalties.. There might be
enough profit to go around.
If the patent owner is greedy, then layoff everybody, liquidate the
company and start all over again by copying somebody else's patent.
11) Have you heard of any stories of people going to jail for patent
infringement?
12) Get ready to mass produce the patent just before the patent
expires.
D from BC

These days there is another option: just re-patent the invention yourself.
It used to be that you could not patent something that has already been
patented, but the USPTO no longer lets such small details get in the way of
increasing throughput and collecting more fees. e.g. 5796296 Any problems
that this new approach introduces will surely be sorted out in an
efficient, fair, and above all cost effective way, by the usual litigation
process.

Once you have your shiny new patent, you just need to sue the original
inventor until he runs out of money and then the invention is yours!

Chris
 
D

D from BC

These days there is another option: just re-patent the invention yourself.
It used to be that you could not patent something that has already been
patented, but the USPTO no longer lets such small details get in the way of
increasing throughput and collecting more fees. e.g. 5796296 Any problems
that this new approach introduces will surely be sorted out in an
efficient, fair, and above all cost effective way, by the usual litigation
process.

Once you have your shiny new patent, you just need to sue the original
inventor until he runs out of money and then the invention is yours!

Chris

That's evil..

Reminds me of the saying:
"He who pays the piper plays the tune."
D from BC
 
D

Don Klipstein

Your remarks have no foundation or basis in fact.

IBM reamed the banking industry for decades. Doesn't matter that
they had SOME good products.

Billy is just a shrewd businessman that chumps like you are jealous
of. Tell us of his "dishonesty".

I can surely tell an example of advancement by mainly ability to be a
bully. I think that reasonably web-searchable is "Microsoft Tax".
That was first and maybe mainly noted to apply back when the current
version of Windows was 3.1 or something like that.
How the "Microsoft Tax" worked, at least at some critical time: In
order to sell computers with a MS OS installed, a computer seller had to
pay Microsoft on basis of number of computers sold regardless of OS or
lack thereof, as opposed to sales of copies and/or installations of MS
operating systems.
A computer seller/reseller/retailer had to have at least two different
sales locations, in order to sell both computers with a MS OS and ones
without (such as a non-MS OS or no OS at all) without paying $$ to MS per
unit sale of computers without a MS OS. At least this is the way I heard
it, through channels where I expected good ability of denial of this if
this was not true.
This reminds me of some case where 3M sells "Scotch Tape" to retailers
at a lower price if they do not sell competing tapes. I remember that one
becoming some Federal court case ending up being decided in favor of 3M.
I think that Congress needs to pass a law expanding the definition of
"Restraint of Trade", although that may not occur until voters vote on a
basis other than candidates selling themselves best via lobbyist $$$$$,
especially in primary elections.
(Please keep in mind - in some US "states", in at least some even number
years there is more than one primary election - an early chance to vote
against an offending Congresscritter may not be on the same day as
opportunity to vote fo a President candidate! Furthermore, keep in mind
that in a few US "states" a Presidential primary election vote is called a
"beauty contest" while votes for specific-candidate-committed-delagates
that "are what really count" are a separate vote, and I am not sure that
in none of USA's 50 "states" the "springtime vote that counts" and the
"beauty contest" are on different dates!)

- Don Klipstein ([email protected])
 
J

James Arthur

Your remarks have no foundation or basis in fact.

IBM reamed the banking industry for decades. Doesn't matter that
they had SOME good products.

Billy is just a shrewd businessman that chumps like you are jealous
of. Tell us of his "dishonesty".

Bill killed DR-DOS by outputting a bogus Windows error message.
Users, worried, abandoned the competitor's product.

The code performing said 'service' was encrypted and self-modifying,
unravelling itself only briefly at runtime. Microsoft denied it
existed. Denied, that is, until this was published:

http://www.ddj.com/showArticle.jhtml?documentID=ddj9309d&pgno=1

Same trick neutralized OS/2. The new release of OS/2 was a safe,
far more advanced, non-crashing, multi-tasking OS at a time when
Windows was still very primitive. Rock-solid DOS compatibility was a
highly-touted selling point--OS/2 could run DOS and even Win3.0 in
virtual machines flawlessly.

Then came Win3.1. Try to run your expensive app in an OS/2 "DOS
box" and an error message pops up. Would-be corporate OS/2 adopters
were scared off, and OS/2 never recovered.

The TSR interface in the DOS days has a similar story: MS changed
it, breaking competitor's products, then offered their own replacement
products.

That's not innovation, that's not creating new and valuable stuff.

Wouldn't it have been nice if they'd instead spent that time and
cleverness making better products?

James Arthur
 
M

MassiveProng

That was first and maybe mainly noted to apply back when the current
version of Windows was 3.1 or something like that.
How the "Microsoft Tax" worked, at least at some critical time: In
order to sell computers with a MS OS installed, a computer seller had to
pay Microsoft on basis of number of computers sold regardless of OS or
lack thereof, as opposed to sales of copies and/or installations of MS
operating systems.


You forgot "In order to get 'Da gud price'".

In order to get a better price schedule, retailers had to make
certain commitments.
 
M

MassiveProng

Bill killed DR-DOS by outputting a bogus Windows error message.
Users, worried, abandoned the competitor's product.

You mean a message during windows install that casts out any install
on other than MS-DOS based systems? SOunds like hedging against a
failure mode to me.
The code performing said 'service' was encrypted and self-modifying,
unravelling itself only briefly at runtime. Microsoft denied it
existed. Denied, that is, until this was published:

http://www.ddj.com/showArticle.jhtml?documentID=ddj9309d&pgno=1

Same trick neutralized OS/2.

Nope OS/2 got fucked by MS. They were supposed to be carried into
the win32 comparability realm, and NS backed out of their agreement.
The new release of OS/2 was a safe,
far more advanced, non-crashing, multi-tasking OS at a time when
Windows was still very primitive.

OS/2 was quite superior, in fact. That was, however, a direct threat
not just to Bills market share, but to his entire empire. What would
you have done?
Rock-solid DOS compatibility was a
highly-touted selling point--OS/2 could run DOS and even Win3.0 in
virtual machines flawlessly.

So could DesqViewX. Better even. It was an Xserver, and could even
run a process on a remote machine if the network was TCP/IP. It was
truly the superior product of it's time, but their failure to get full
win32 comparability was their downfall as well.
Then came Win3.1. Try to run your expensive app in an OS/2 "DOS
box" and an error message pops up.

One doesn't run a win32 app in a DOS VDM.
Would-be corporate OS/2 adopters
were scared off, and OS/2 never recovered.

OS/2 was in use in nearly EVERY bank in the entire world, right up
until they started with Windows 2000 over a year after it made its
debut.
The TSR interface in the DOS days has a similar story: MS changed
it, breaking competitor's products, then offered their own replacement
products.

Quarterdeck's products didn't suffer from it. All it took was
strong engineering on the part of the other DOS makers, and they
didn't belly up to the bar. Crying will get you nowhere in this
world.
That's not innovation, that's not creating new and valuable stuff.

No. That is hedging one's bets.
Wouldn't it have been nice if they'd instead spent that time and
cleverness making better products?

They have made better products. I shudder to think how slogging
along at IBMs pace and mindset, and PRICE would have affected the
American consumer, much less the rest of the personal computing world.

Just so you know, I was going to become an OS/2 engineer.
 
J

James Arthur

On 25 Mar 2007 01:31:51 -0700, "James Arthur"
<[email protected]> Gave us:

OS/2 was quite superior, in fact. That was, however, a direct threat
not just to Bills market share, but to his entire empire. What would
you have done?

I would've done what I'd already promised long before to improve my
product: delivered premptive-multitasking (not delivered until more
than a decade later), and protected-mode for applications (to end the
all-too-common full-system lock-ups).

[snip]
No. That is hedging one's bets.

In the sense that Tonya Harding was hedging her bets?[1] No,
offering two products with different features is hedging. Win3.1 and
NT, for example.

[1] Tonya Harding, Nancy Kerrigan, ice skaters, 1994 Olympics,
remember?
They have made better products. I shudder to think how slogging
along at IBMs pace and mindset, and PRICE would have affected the
American consumer, much less the rest of the personal computing world.

I had a self-bought copy of OS/2 then that I never loaded, having
heard of murky "compatibility problems" (the bogus AARD code, it
turned out). In my estimation, Microsoft held back the computer
revolution--and its benefits to the world--a decade, at least.
Just so you know, I was going to become an OS/2 engineer.

Then you'd especially appreciate this code, from Fig. 3 of the
article I linked to:

IF DOS version >= 10.0 (i.e., OS/2)
THEN don't set [bp+196h], so eventually OR AX, 2000h fails

Best,
James Arthur
 
M

MassiveProng

In the sense that Tonya Harding was hedging her bets?[1]
Nope.

No,
offering two products with different features is hedging. Win3.1 and
NT, for example.

[1] Tonya Harding, Nancy Kerrigan, ice skaters, 1994 Olympics,
remember?


Yeah. Fucktard comparison.
 
R

Rich Grise

Wouldn't it have been nice if they'd instead spent that time and
cleverness making better products?

Yeah. It'd also be nice if I had wings. ;-)

Thanks!
Rich
 
P

Paul Hovnanian P.E.

MassiveProng said:
[snip]

OS/2 was quite superior, in fact. That was, however, a direct threat
not just to Bills market share, but to his entire empire. What would
you have done?

OS/2 was a joint Microsoft/IBM project up to a point. Microsoft could
have elected to go with OS/2 as the basis of their product line.
Instead, they worked to undermine it even while they were still
partnered with IBM.
So could DesqViewX. Better even. It was an Xserver, and could even
run a process on a remote machine if the network was TCP/IP. It was
truly the superior product of it's time, but their failure to get full
win32 comparability was their downfall as well.

A network capable display technology flew in the face of Microsoft's
policy to sell one copy of each app per seat.

[snip]
Just so you know, I was going to become an OS/2 engineer.

About the time Microsoft was exiting the OS/2 partnership with IBM, the
company I worked for was dragging everyone who didn't know any better to
OS/2 school. The existing IT folks supporting it were leaving faster
than proverbial rats leaving a sinking ship. They understood the folly
of going against the Microsoft marketing machine. Even though Microsoft
has yet to develop something that is barely a shadow of that system,
they figured it was better to bide their time with Windows
3.1/95/98/NT/2000 and now Vista than to incur the wrath of the monster
from Redmond.

The smart folks with the big engineering apps jumped over to Unix or
just never left. Call me when Vista is a viable candidate for a Beowulf
cluster.
 
R

Richard The Dreaded Libertarian

That's evil..

Reminds me of the saying:
"He who pays the piper plays the tune."

Remember the Golden Rule: The guy that's got the gold makes the rules.

More's the pity. )-;

Thanks,
Rich
 
M

MassiveProng

OS/2 was a joint Microsoft/IBM project up to a point. Microsoft could
have elected to go with OS/2 as the basis of their product line.
Instead, they worked to undermine it even while they were still
partnered with IBM.

OS/2 was ALL IBM, and they had an agreement with MicroSoft to be
provided with the required code base to give them win 32 support.

THAT is what they backed out of.
 
M

MassiveProng

The smart folks with the big engineering apps jumped over to Unix or
just never left. Call me when Vista is a viable candidate for a Beowulf
cluster.


Likely never happen as it is a specifically keyed to desktop use OS.

You may see an XP embedded clustering application though.

Most of the embedded folks hate the fact that MS killed their
NT/Win2k embedded support,and has forced them all to the slightly
larger XP embedded kernels.

I wonder how the easily superscalar "cell" CPU will progress in all
this multicore mux.
 
Top