HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: akbloom@aplcenmp.apl.jhu.edu (Keith Bloom)
Subject: Re: Freedom of Choice Act
Organization: The Johns Hopkins University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 12:46:48 GMT

emetzger@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:

>In response to the query on the constitutionality of the
>Freedom of Choice Act, the proposed law which would set limits on
>the extent to which a state may intrude on a woman's decision
>to have an abortion--

>I believe this law would have no effect whatsoever in reserving
>a sphere of autonomy to the woman. There is no question of
>deferrment to Congress by the Court: the Court decides, when
>called upon to do so, what powers the state has in respect to
>abortion. Congress cannot simply ignore these state powers and
>declare that the state has fewer powers than the Court has permitted.
>The issue is really quite the same as that posed by the limitations
>on a woman's actions. In each and every abortion decision, the Court
>allots certain powers both to the state and to the woman under the
>aegis of the Constitution. Mere legislation (e.g., the FOCA) can
>never trump the Constitution.

It's true that Congress cannot trump the Constitution, but Congress
*can* trump the States, in many areas.  In the area of civil rights,
for instance, the Fourteenth Amendment says "The Congress shall have
power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this
article."  This doesn't mean that Congress *must* pass legislation,
but if it does decide to do so, such legislation will take precedence
over any State laws addressing the same issue.


Keith
From: bobk@dogear.spk.wa.us (Bob Kirkpatrick)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: 4 Q's: Deadly Self-Defense Against Rape
Keywords: Why, sure!  I have five dollars for each of you . . .
Date: 13 Nov 92 04:48:49 GMT
Organization: Dog Ear'd Systems of Spokane, WA

matt@smoke.brl.mil (Matthew Rosenblatt) writes:

> Fortunately, California *really is* a "People's Republic" in the
> best sense of the term -- at least, when it comes to the People's
> power to resist judicial tyranny.  That's because even Justices of
> the California Supreme Court are subject to recall if the voters
> get fed up with their perversions of justice.  And indeed, the
> reason Mr. Cramer can use the past tense ("we *had* a liberal . . .")
> is that the People of California got fed up with Rose Bird and
> a few of her knee-jerk, fuzzy-minded, bleeding-heart liberal
> colleagues, and voted to recall them from office.  This, folks,
> is democracy in action, where judges are ultimately the servants
> of the people rather than their masters.
> 

I don't know if you can make quite that sweeping a statement, Matt. The
truth is, that it takes someone like Rose Bird's angering a lobby or
organization with voice in order to bring about a recall. This doesn't
exactly denote 'democracy in action,' although it is certainly an aspect.
There are quite a few 'errors' (subjective differences of perception) on
virtually a daily basis, but most individuals, even in numbers, aren't
able (for one reason or another) to bring about a recall.

I'd suspect that, in a way, this disenfranchises a great many people who
don't have the organization, funding, or skill to initiate a recall ref-
erendum.

--- 
Bob Kirkpatrick <bobk@dogear.spk.wa.us>
Dog Ear'd Systems of Spokane, WA
From: 31babik@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Name Change in Michigan?
Date: 12 Nov 92 19:31:52 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University

I live in Michigan and am interested in getting my name changed.  
Unfortunately, I don't have even an inkling of where I should begin
the process.

I would greatly appreciate it if someone could give me some ideas.

Thanks, 
  LM

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Lisamarie Babik
                      31babik@gw.wmich.edu
 CS MAJORS:  We do more after 11:00 p.m. than most people do all day.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: drears@pica.army.mil (Dennis G Rears <drears>)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: why so much to imprison someone?
Keywords: XIIIth Amendment
Date: 5 Nov 92 23:15:42 GMT
Organization: U.S. Army  Armament Research Development & Engineering Center, Dover NJ

In article <19339@smoke.brl.mil> matt@smoke.brl.mil (Matthew Rosenblatt) writes:
>
>An even better way would be to sentence a convicted criminal to 
>be sold as a slave to a private corporation for a term of years.  
>(Naturally, the corporation's treatment of the convict would have 
>to conform to VIIIth Amendment standards.)  Not only would this 
>cost the taxpayers Zero, but whatever the private corporation paid 
>the government in return for the right to the convict's labor for 
>the specified term of years would come as Profit to the taxpayers.
>It could go to reduce the deficit!

-after deleting a bunch of stuff-

  It could be a good idea.  How would you deal with the following
implimentation procedures in these enlightened times:

  1)  Without the threat of physical force or deprivation of food/water
  how can one coerce one to do work?

  2)  What about escape?  World opinion for the most part is against slavery.
  If a slave escapes to another country, most likely he would not be
  returned to the U.S.

  3)  International sanctions.  We complain against chinese inmates
  producing products for export.  Is it allowed?

   
>
>Moreover, it stands to reason that the longer the term of service
>the purchaser is getting, the more money he will be willing to pay
>for it.  I have long advocated imprisoning violent first offenders
>for at least thirty years to protect the public, because a violent
>offender has proven by his actions that he cannot or will not restrain 
>his impulses to do violence to others.  One might think that only
>bleeding-heart, knee-jerk, fuzzy-minded liberals would object to
>doing this, but even fellow conservatives have responded, "How are
>we going to pay to keep them in prison for so many years?"  Using
>the XIIIth Amendment to sell convicted violent criminals into slavery
>for thirty years provides an answer to this objection:  The longer
>we keep the violent criminal out of circulation, the more profit
>we'll make from his purchaser.

  Aren't the violent criminals less educated and less trained to do
productive work?

dennis
Xref: sparky misc.legal:19895 alt.folklore.urban:28457
From: elvis@netcom.com ('kEvin')
Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: Supreme Ct. Insurance non-ruling
Date: 13 Nov 92 23:00:36 GMT
Followup-To: alt.folklore.urban
Distribution: usa
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

mwhhlaw!tim (Timothy E. Hollingsworth) writes:

>By the way, the tenor of the posts imply that if an insurance company pays
>the treatment is "free."  Reminds me of an actual event at a public meeting on
                                            ^^^^^^ - ?
>the savings and loan problem.  A man stood up and said that the taxpayers
>should not have to bear the cost of the bailout.  He was asked who should
>pay the cost and replied "the government should."

urban legend?

kEvin
Newsgroups: misc.legal.computing,misc.int.property,comp.software-eng
From: srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian)
Subject: Object Oriented Software Patent Lawsuits
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 19:07:15 GMT


   Here's a little news item that portends the messy future to come for
software patents.  From my own studies, I have noticed a growing number
of Object Oriented software patents.

Greg Aharonian
Source Translation & Optimization

#1992, Oct
    IntelliCorp (Mountain View, CA) was into objects before objects were
really cool.  Or so implies Katherine Branscomb anyway, the company's
president and chief executive officer, who likes to tell the tale of how
Intellicorp patented several techniques for connecting objects into
relational databases via SQL way back in 1984.  IntelliCorp, which now sells
integrated computer-aided software engineering products for client/server
environments, doesn't intend to sue everyone using objects in order to make
them pony up licensing fees.  Still, Branscomb says, certain vendors can
expect to be hearing from IntelliCorp's attorneys over the next few months.
[Datamation 11/1/92, 17]



-- 
**************************************************************************
Greg Aharonian
Source Translation & Optimiztion
P.O. Box 404, Belmont, MA 02178
Newsgroups: misc.legal.computing
From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Patent info request
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 06:14:55 GMT
Distribution: misc
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <1992Nov10.023640.5003@udel.edu> berryh@huey.udel.edu (John Berryhill, Ph.D.) writes:

[In a previous post I included a standard disclaimer -- that my posting
was not legal advice and that for legal advice one should see a lawyer.]

[In a followup post Dr. Berryhill comments on such standard disclaimers,
which lawyers generally include in their postings.]

>Sure, the answer to every question could be "get a lawyer."

No, that's not the point.  When a lawyer says this the lawyer is _not_
saying that the answer to every question is "get a lawyer".  
No, the lawyer is merely trying to minimize the risk that a reader
will attempt to take a Usenet posting as legal advice.


Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax 212-765-2519
Newsgroups: misc.legal.computing
From: bobk@gibdo.engr.washington.edu (Bob)
Newsgroups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games
Subject: Re: Play Super Nintendo and Genesis games with Game Doctor?!!!
Date: 10 Nov 92 00:56:20 GMT
Organization: University of Washington

al885@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Gerard Pinzone) writes:
| I heard about a card that will allow an IBM play SNES and Genesis games!
| 
| I think it's called Game Doctor...anyone else hear of this?
|
| If so, where can you buy it?!

yen1366@cucs18.cs.cuhk.hk (Yen Chui Tin) writes:
|  No, the Game Doctor can not allow an IBM to play SNES nor Genesis games but
| let you upload games to your game systems via the Doctor. The games program
| can be stored in your MS-DOS format and load it into the doctor when you
| want to play it. A popular MGD2 doctor cost about HK$1000 (US$125) including
| 16Mb DRAM, Genesis interface and PC-link.

  Is this legal in the United States?  Hong Kong?  

  I haven't been following the developments in this area, so I would
  appreciate comments about the general legality of a product that 
  copies other copyrighted products such as video games.

  What about the legalities of such items as 1) cable-tv descramblers,
  2) products that allow you to copy video or audio tape cassettes,
  3) products that allow you defeat the copy-protection on software disks.

  If some of these items are legal, shouldn't a product such as the Game
  Doctor also be legal?
  ==

  Bob                                             Seattle, Washington
Newsgroups: misc.legal.computing
From: bhayden@teal.csn.org (Bruce Hayden)
Subject: Re: Patent info request
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
Distribution: misc
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 05:08:17 GMT

berryh@huey.udel.edu (John Berryhill, Ph.D.) writes:

>By all means, get someone who can adequately claim your invention.  Get
>someone who can draft responses while avoiding undue estoppels.  Get
>someone who won't make inadvertent admissions of prior art.  Get someone
>who doesn't unduly limit the equivalents listed in the spec.  But above
>all else, get someone who understands the invention.

I'll second this last one.

>Back on the question at hand, if we've sufficiently ungored everyone's
>oxen, if you have an idea for an invention, there are places you can
>go if you don't have a lot of money or if you can't get a free consultation.
>There are non-profit groups which help inventors to help themselves, one
>of which is the American Society of Inventors (the address of which I'll
>post if anyone wants it and I can find where I've got it buried).
>The ASI is NOT one of those 900-number "invention development" operations
>which you've seen on matchbook covers.  For-profit invention developers
>tend to be shady operations more often than not, and, as Carl will be
>more than happy to tell you, are very limited in the services that they
>may provide and the kinds of financial arrangemts that they may make with
>patent attorneys or agents.

In Colorado we have the Rocky Mountain Inventors Congress. I (and a couple
of other patent attys.) sell them fairly hard (I am a member). One piece of
advice comes through over and over: the average inventor would often do 
much better if he spent his resources in getting the product to market
instead of trying to patent it. Anyway, the group is very helpful in
networking, and helping inventors learn the ropes. I would suspect that
many other communities have similar organizations.

>Attorneys in other fields find it rather odd, but patent attorneys ARE
>allowed to accept a financial interest in the patent as payment for
>their services.  I've never run into one that did, but its worth a shot.

Our firm has taken parts of patents on a contingency basis. It is not 
common: maybe one or two a year for 8 patent attys. More recently, we 
have been taking an interest in the revenue stream instead of an ownership
interest. The problem with most patents for individuals is that even if the
idea is very good, they can never market the idea sufficiently to make
patenting the invention worth our time (on a contingency basis). So, what
we look for is 1) a good idea, and 2) ability to market the idea.

Bruce Hayden
bhayden@csn.org
(303) 758-8400

Newsgroups: misc.legal.computing
From: dave@lacerta.unm.edu (Dave Grisham)
Subject: Using FDISK (DOS 5)
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 21:30:46 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

We have setup a couple of disks with only DOS 5's FDISK utility
on them for removing certain cross viral infections.  
We make anyone checking software from our librarian sign a form saying 
that they will not copy our notchless disk's software.  Since FDISK is only 
a utility of MS DOS and they promise not to copy would we be misusing the
license agreement by placing this utility in our library for loan? --grish
dave@ariel.unm.edu
Newsgroups: misc.legal.computing
From: whs70@dancer.uucp (22501-sohl)
Subject: Kodak Photo CD
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 20:37:05 GMT


I was at the local WIZ yesterday and saw one of the new
Kodak CD viewing systems on display.  Pretty neat, a single
CD can have up to 95 individual pictures on it.  But that is
not the point of this post....

Someone has told me that Kodak has asserted
that it is completely and uttery illegal for anyone to write any
program which reads and displays the contents of one of their
new PhotoCD volumes without a valid license from Kodak because
they assert that Kodak has patented the file format.

As I understand it, Kodak isn't asserting this claim over
the source or binary of the application developer's kit,
or even over the compression algorithms (which  may
be off-the-shelf), but on the disk file format itself.

The supposed set of events that have lead to this is
because someone in Germany may have
reverse-engineered the file format and posted a small
set of C (Unix) routines so that the various existing
image-viewing tools could be expanded to include PhotoCD
images.  In response to that, they, Kodak, has supposedly
asserted that any program not licensed by Kodak can not legally
do anything with the contents of PhotoCD disk volume.   

Does anyone know anymore about this, seems like an interesting discussion
item for this newgroup.

One question seems apparent:  If the file format is patented,
wouldn't that mean that the information/details about the format are
available to anyone that looked up the patent?  In other words,
why would anyone then have to "reverse engineer" the format?

Just curious.

Newsgroups: misc.legal.computing
From: ekaftan@tolten.puc.cl (ekaftan)
Subject: Technical/legal question.
Organization: Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 18:50:01 GMT


	Hello, I have a tech/legal question and need some help, I
hope someone here can help me.

	If a firm is supposed to type data into computer terminals,
should that job be considered 'Automatic data procesing?'.

	Please let me know your comments, opinions, past experience,
or anything you think might help. You can post or e-mail and I'll 
post a summary.

	Thanks in advance. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eduardo Kaftanski

ekaftan@tolten.puc.cl
ekaftan@ing.puc.cl
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: bhayden@teal.csn.org (Bruce Hayden)
Newsgroups: misc.legal.computing
Subject: Re: Patent info request
Date: 7 Nov 92 13:40:02 GMT
Distribution: misc
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.

berryh@huey.udel.edu (John Berryhill, Ph.D.) writes:


>Both Carl Oppedahl and Bruce Hayden have told you that step one is
>to get a patent attorney.  That's not surprising since they are both
>patent attorneys.  However, you should know that there is a much
>cheaper alternative since practice before the patent office and the
>board of appeals happens to be one area of law where non-lawyers can
>be admitted (and, yes to the patent attorneys, the Supreme Court has
>ruled that such practice properly constitutes the practice of law).

>Among the other publications that you'll find at your local Patent
>Depository Library (of which I'll post the list as soon as I remember
>to bring it home from work), is a directory of registered patent attorneys
>and agents.  Patent agents are people who do not have law degrees, but
>who DO have technical degrees and have passed the examination to
>practice before the U.S. Patent Office.

>To suggest that a patent attorney is necessary for obtaining a decent
>patent is quite simply wrong.  It is true, however, that unless you
>want to spend quite a bit of time learning a somewhat arcane body of
>rules, laws, and cases, you are best advised to seek professional
>guidance - but that guidance need not be provided by a lawyer.

>-- 
>                                                John Berryhill, Ph.D.

Actually, as one of the patent attorneys mentioned above, you may
surprised to discover that I do not disagree with JB. Patent agents,
probably because they don't have the time invested in law school that
we do, are almost allways cheaper. Unfortunately, it is harder to find
them, since the local bars invariably try to keep them limited in
their advertising. Dr. Berryhill's suggestion is a good one for finding
one. You can also get the publication from the PTO. In fact, that is
the only way I know who the patent agents are in Colo. where I
practice.

Technically, there are a couple of services that we (as patent attys)
can provide that a patent agent cannot. A patent agent cannot tell you
whether a patent is valid or not. That would be interpretation of a 
legal document for another, and thus the unlicensed practice of law.
He possibly may not be able to tell you if the prior art makes your
invention unpatentable. However, this latter is borderline since he
definately can take the same prior art and write an application that
claims around that prior art.

The place where I would draw the line is that if you want to obtain 
a patent, a patent agent is an excellent choice. However, if someone
accuses you of patent infringement, contact a patent atty.

Also, I want to reitterate my point that you look for someone (whether
agent or atty) who understands software and software patents. I see
every day what I consider malpractice by otherwise competent patent
attys. when they try to deal with software.

Bruce Hayden
bhayden@csn.org
(303) 758-8400
Newsgroups: misc.legal.computing
From: bhayden@teal.csn.org (Bruce Hayden)
Subject: Re: Selling products created from development tools
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 13:56:49 GMT

twriter1@pencom.com writes:

>Here's the story.  Say you have a very powerful development tool.
>Many people want to use the things you can make from this tool, but
>don't have the time or desire to start from scratch. (It's very
>complicated and there are no good books published yet on how to use it.)
>There is a runtime version of this tool, so if you created stuff with
>it you could sell the stuff to people who had just the runtime version.

>I would like to find out if this is legal.  I presume I would have
>to ask the company who makes the tool, but I have no idea who to 
>talk to or what questions to ask them.

>I can't just make something with this tool and sell it without
>somehow acknowledging the company that makes the tool, can I?
>The company is not at this time selling products developed with the
>tool, just the tool itself.

Including the tool in programs that you sell is probably copyright
infringement since you are in essence copying the work w/o permission.
Thus, to be legal, you should get a license from the C/R holder.
Often, they will have a special type of license for these situations.
I have yet to understand the advantages to attributing the work to
its owner/creator. Attribution does nothing to protect you from
a claim of C/R infringement. Indeed, it could be argued that it makes
the job of the owner/creator easier in suing you for C/R infringement.

Bruce Hayden
bhayden@csn.org
(303) 758-8400
From: kpjone01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Subject: Westlaw Database Service
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 03:31:49 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

Does anyone know of any company in the US that offers small law firms the 
ability to access Westlaw without actually siging up for the Westlaw service?
 Any help is appreciated. 
 
Kevin

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Kevin Jones                                   KPJONE01@ULKYVX.CT.LOUISVILLE.EDU
Lab Supervisor                                KPJONE01@ULKYVX.LOUISVILLE.EDU
Computing and Telecommunications              PHONE:  502-588-6303
University of Louisville, KY                  FAX:    502-588-0150

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: rkraga01@romulus.spd.louisville.edu (Dr. Ragade)
Subject: Re: Object Oriented Software Patent Lawsuits
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:44:01 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

In <BxEvs4.A8E@world.std.com> srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian) writes:
Jim : This note may interest you.  Rammohan
>   Here's a little news item that portends the messy future to come for
>software patents.  From my own studies, I have noticed a growing number
>of Object Oriented software patents.

>Greg Aharonian
>Source Translation & Optimization

>#1992, Oct
>    IntelliCorp (Mountain View, CA) was into objects before objects were
>really cool.  Or so implies Katherine Branscomb anyway, the company's
>president and chief executive officer, who likes to tell the tale of how
>Intellicorp patented several techniques for connecting objects into
>relational databases via SQL way back in 1984.  IntelliCorp, which now sells
>integrated computer-aided software engineering products for client/server
>environments, doesn't intend to sue everyone using objects in order to make
>them pony up licensing fees.  Still, Branscomb says, certain vendors can
>expect to be hearing from IntelliCorp's attorneys over the next few months.
>[Datamation 11/1/92, 17]



>-- 
>**************************************************************************
>Greg Aharonian
>Source Translation & Optimiztion
>P.O. Box 404, Belmont, MA 02178
Newsgroups: misc.legal.computing