Eminent Domain Applied to IP Due To State Secrets 312
NormalVisual writes "Wired recently ran a story about a group of inventors that found themselves unable to sue Lucent Technologies for infringement of a patent they held on a novel design for a pipe/cable connector. They had been working with Lucent on an underwater application for this connector, but unfortunately for the inventors, Lucent's application was being developed for an as-yet-unnamed branch of the U.S. government. The government is now claiming a state-secret privilege, and is refusing to let the inventors sue Lucent for patent infringement, citing national security concerns. In the meantime, Lucent continues to directly profit from their invention without paying any royalties or other compensation. The patent in question can be found online. It's doubly a shame because, unlike so many other patents that we've seen here, this one is actually creative and non-obvious." We've touched on this topic before.
Future effects....? (Score:2, Interesting)
Funny how things work. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Ridiculous. (Score:3, Interesting)
It simply is not a matter of whats "fair" sadly its how the law is written.. Badly. Most likly an old cold war law, that doesn't make sense in todays society.
Funny .. (Score:3, Interesting)
Emminent domain would be a FAIRER solution (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, doing this would make major patent holders a little more nervous, but it's still a more equitable resultion under the rule of law than "no, you can't sue him, even though you're getting screwed." In the meanwhile, all these guys can do under the current mess is fall back on "peacable petition for redress of grievances"... which is not likely to be effective in this political climate.
Re:It's not eminent domain without fair compensati (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:state sanctioned theft.. (Score:3, Interesting)
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people's attention from other problems, to shift blame forfailures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice--relentless propaganda and disinformation--were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite "spontaneous" acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and"terrorists." Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.
5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.
6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes' excesses.
7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting "national security," and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite's behavior was incompatible wi
What it is for (Score:3, Interesting)
This could be useful for tapping cables if they used the widely known technique the NSA used of storing data in a recorder and coming back periodically to retrieve it. You have to connect a cable to the recorder when you come back to read out the data. It would make sense to have an ROV do this. Also, ROV capability has been emphasized in the public information about the Jimmy Carter. Another possibility is that the submarine would hold a shortish length of cable from the tap site due to limited capacity (although the Carter has quite a bit), pay that out, and have a cable laying ship drop an ROV to connect to a longer cable which would go to shore. If you had a connector that you could connect with an ROV, you could do the long cable lay with the surface ship after the sub was done to make it harder to figure out what cable was being tapped.
Re:Clearing up the issues (Score:3, Interesting)
It does not say that Congress has the power to exempt the government from respecting the exclusive rights they have already secured for the inventor - otherwise it would mean the right was not in fact exclusive. Still less does it say that the government can exempt some corporation of which it is a customer from respecting the inventor's rights. By saying that the inventor cannot sue the private firm infringing the patent or or present facts mateeial to suc a suit, the patent has in fact been taken, since a patent is nothing but a right to buing suit in order to prevent unlicensed use. If the information needed to make the case is a governmental secret, then the least prejudicial remedy is to close that part of the hearing to the public and seal that portion of the record.
Even if the government believes it needs some patented invention for national security, it has no constitutional right to use it without the consent of the holder of the patent rights unless the government can demonstrate that it cannot effectively excercise its right to provide for the common defense without the use of the invention. Defense is not synonymous with military or intelligence use. The government should bear the burden of proof that the proposed use was indispensible in preventing or repelling a reasonably forseeable actual attack, and even then must provide just compesation for that use.
We use the Fascists' symbol, too (Score:4, Interesting)
This emblem on Mussolini's flag of office, the symbol of his Partito Nazionale Fascista, and the the present Guardia Civil (Franco's jackbooted thugs) can also be found on the the 1916-1945 US dimes, the Lincoln memorial chair; all over the US Capitol, including multiple copies on the Speaker's rostrum, the National Guard insignia, etc, etc,
Re:state sanctioned theft.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Just because someone did it in the past doesn't mean they were right. FDR did quite a large number of very wrong things. Pres. Bush continues those bad policies, and that makes him just as bad, same as it made Pres. Clinton. It would be wrong to say they are anyone other than Pres. Rooselvelt's fault, but everyone since shares in the blame for continuing things.
We see bloating of the Federal, the requisite reduction in State's rights, numerous reductions in freedoms, and any number of other bad laws whenever Congress is controlled by the same party as the Presidency. This would be much less of a problem if those Populist idiots hadn't gotten there way in the beginning of the 20th century. Yay for the 17th amendment, that which guaranteed the end of our federalist government.
If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it's a duck. The US is displaying all of the major definition points of what fascism is.
"(From dictionary.com:) fascism, noun
1. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism."
1) This country isn't quite ruled by a dictator, yet. We *are* ruled by a small group of people that do impose their will however they see fit. They've put into law various things that allow them to do as they please. The President can do basically whatever he wants to whomever he wants.
2) The Federal is legislating morality and attempting to use force to alter social issues. They are also meddling heavily in the economy.
3) The Federal can arbitrarily take your land and other property, imprison you, has the power to censor things, and tries quite regularly to do so. Most people believe that they are breaking a law by almost anything they do, and they aren't far from the truth.
4) The Federal does not care about other countries; it will do anything to benefit the US, at the expense of foreign countries, peoples, and freedoms. It has routinely tried and/or succeeded at overthrowing foreign governments. The populace is pro-US, anti-everyone else, so long as they benefit in some way. "Who cares about the Mid-East, as long as we get our oil; just bomb 'em and take the stuff." It is increasingly more "The USA v. everyone else".
Now, I certainly don't want this country to be fascist, but it is what it is. I want our freedoms back, I want to shut down most of the Federal and bring it back to the States and Towns, and I want this country to get the hell out of other countries' government affairs. (and I want other things too
They did it with helicopter patents (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:state sanctioned theft.. (Score:1, Interesting)
Well, the government recently held that US Citizens can be taken on US soil as enemy combatants and held secretly, without being charged, and indefinitely. Couple that with the government's position that torture is quaint and has already been used to kill people being held and I think there is real cause to be afraid.
If a little bit more McCarthyism type hysteria takes hold, the precedents that have been established bode ill for us, I fear.