micks56

7 ms·

1.
by micks56 14y ago
Sure, but don't try to hack this metric too much. Manufacturers use it and don't try to game it. They actually want to improve it. Apple partners with Foxcon to get this number at 5, and wouldn't have it at 5 if they didn't believe Foxcon c
2.
by micks56 14y ago
Some misconceptions in this thread on how inventory turnover is calculated. It is (commonly) calculated as COGS / Average Inventory. Let's say your COGS for a Macbook is $500. You buy material on Jan 1 to make it, assemble on Jan 2, and shi
3.
by micks56 14y ago
Failure to warn is only one component of liability. There is design defect, manufacturing defect, negligence, and so on. "It's complicated" is very accurate.
4.
by micks56 14y ago
I'm not defending the legal field in its entirety, but your opinion would change if you or your loved one were harmed or killed.
5.
by micks56 14y ago
Not totally accurate. There isn't much uncertainty in the law, but rather whether you broke it. Plaintiff has the burden of proof. And while there may not be a specific statute spelling out liability, case law has equal wait in the US. Here
6.
by micks56 15y ago
Despite the "no refund for deposits" clause, you are entitled to your full money back. It doesn't matter that they offer no warranties, express or implied, either. You may have to go to small claims court to get it. Or you may have to get a
7.
by micks56 15y ago
The PDP-Linux maker should be sued for copyright (and trademark) infringement. Buyers may believe they are getting RedHat Linux because that is what the cover is, but they are not getting Red Hat Linux. Once again, the programmer's work is
8.
by micks56 15y ago
Those two pictures are not out of context. They are from the case that Baio cited himself. On Baio's blog ( http://waxy.org/2011/06/kind_of_screwed/ ) he cites an "influential paper on fair use" as his reasoning and authority for his own fa
9.
by micks56 15y ago
I don't think that your distinctions are fair. Source code changes that I am suggesting will allow the new BaioNix to functionally "work" just as Linux does, just like how Baio created a picture but it "works" as a homage to an earlier Mile
10.
by micks56 15y ago
I think your attempt at a distinction in paragraph 1 actually proves my point. Yes, GPL covers binaries, or however else the code is distributed. Just like how copyright law protects a Miles Davis picture on an album cover, a CD liner, and
11.
by micks56 15y ago
First, I can't say that I am surprised my post currently sits at 4 downvotes here on HN. A programmer's work is sacred while a photographer's is not. Use some common sense? Baio absolutely published the photograph, which is why we are all h
12.
by micks56 15y ago
Hypothetical: Baio downloads the latest Linux kernel. He changes all variable and function names to words of his choosing. Baio now says that he has the right to distribute BaioNix code free from GPL copyright restrictions and does so. The
13.
by micks56 15y ago
I am a lawyer, and have studied copyright law, and in my opinion Baio's work is not even close to transformative. Or course this is a matter of interpretation and we are deciding on degrees, but here is an example of what transformative is:
14.
by micks56 15y ago
Show the bosses this chart: http://www.deadondemand.com/products/digitalshredder/ It describes how much money they will personally owe and how much prison time each of them could do when there is a breach. note: I have no financial intere
15.
by micks56 15y ago
I have a BS/MS in Electrical & Computer Engineering. For a while I designed/manufactured sensor systems. Our customers were nuclear plants, oil refineries, chemical plants, etc. My company had a line of products that monitored steam val
16.
by micks56 15y ago
Former steam valve monitoring engineer here. The motivation for moving from "per valve" to "total for all valves" was cost savings in monitoring. There are thousands of these in plants. Operators didn't want to have to check each one indivi
17.
by micks56 15y ago
I am a lawyer, and what ggchappell said is correct. The work required to license either isn't difficult. Arguing back and forth on terms is how the legal bills add up. It all boils down to how much money must be paid. Your product is mostly
18.
by micks56 15y ago
Yes, copyright and TM are different, but both can be handled similarly. Let's start with similarities. You can register both individually, and then execute a licensing contract for each afterward. You sign and the new party signs. Terms of
19.
by micks56 15y ago
You are correct, but there are some gotchas, too. 1. Hopefully you incorporated in your state and actually have the protection, not as a Delaware LLC, which might not help you. Hopefully you paid the yearly fees and did the registration req
20.
by micks56 15y ago
> I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. Ha. If you were a lawyer you would know that saying "this is not legal advice" doesn't actually turn legal advice into non-legal advice. The whole post is legal advice. EDIT: I think that i
21.
by micks56 15y ago
No, it wouldn't work. The reason why is at the very heart of copyright law. You need to learn this area. Owning copyright to a work gives the owner EXCLUSIVE rights to distribution of that work. Therefore, just because you sold a legal copy
22.
by micks56 15y ago
They probably don't need any license. What rifftrax is doing is selling you an mp3 with their own comedy on it. It is a completely new work. The customer buys/rents the companion DVD and then syncs. That is slightly different than OP becaus
23.
by micks56 15y ago
I have an idea for you. This might work. You REALLY need to read up on Copyright Law, though. To be honest, you might not be the best person for this. You may want to speak with an experienced copyright person. Anyway... This might work: St
24.
by micks56 15y ago
No. Filing in a state that you aren't yet doing business has no benefit and could actually hurt you. By registering in a state you are consenting to being sued there. Why would you register a Delaware (or elsewhere) LLC when you are in Cali
25.
by micks56 15y ago
Yup. Also, doing business in your home state is automatic. Working there = doing business there. Filing an LLC in another state without actually doing business there is useless.
26.
by micks56 15y ago
That changes nothing. Still copyright infringement. See above.
27.
by micks56 15y ago
Transformation and educational purpose do not mean what you think they mean. 1. Transformation is more than adding your own translation on top of the movie. You need to change the meaning or expression of the work. The meaning of your versi
28.
by micks56 15y ago
That is copyright infringement, and would not constitute fair use. Around ycnews it is often said to not worry about that. No one will sue you until you get big, and then you can negotiate. I have no opinion on that advice. Studios are unli
29.
by micks56 15y ago
I definitely didn't mean that. Thanks for the clarification.
30.
by micks56 15y ago
Corporate protection does not extend to criminal acts conducted by directors, officers, or employees.

More ›