Source Code, Object Code, and The Da Vinci Code: The Debate on Intellectual Property Protection for Software Programs
Neelakantan, Murali; Armstrong, Alex
Computer and Internet Lawyer
10-01-2006
Jump to best part of documentYour Summary Note
For many years, the courts in England and the United States have tried to balance the protection of an author's skill and labor with the competing notion of a free market in which ideas are adapted in the search for newer and better products. It is sometimes argued that "what is worth copying is worth protecting." This statement is only a crude approximation of the central theme in a debate that remains as controversial now as it was 25 years ago-the suitability of a copyright or a patent-based regime for software programs.
For purposes of this article, we have restricted our analysis to the two markets that are likely to be of most interest to the reader-the United States and the United Kingdom. The debate has, however, taken on truly global proportions, with new and exciting markets (and competitive pressures) emanating from the Far East, India, and China most notably. The questions asked in this article are designed therefore to apply globally.
Copyright in Software Programs
The ease with which copyright is granted sometimes betrays its limitations. Is copyright still "fit for purpose" as the global market for software continues its inexorable expansion?
In order to answer this question, this section will seek to:
* Examine the existing state of copyright law as it applies to software programs; and
* Determine whether current copyright law remains flexible enough to capture the dramatic changes to the methods used by developers to create software programs.
The English Law of Copyright
The English law of copyright is often described as drawing clear dividing lines between the idea (which is not protectable per se) and the expression of an idea (which would be). This is a misleading simplification of the relevant provision of the Copyright, Designs and Patent Act 1988,1 which requires that a work be recorded "in writing or otherwise"2 before it can be afforded the protection of copyright. The law says that copyright is infringed if (a) there has been actual copying, and (b) a "substantial part" of the work has been taken. What amounts to a "substantial part" is a question of fact and degree and is the question that has exercised the courts most in the field of computer software.
In Cantor Fitzgerald v. Tradition (UK),3 the court considered whether the developers of a rival bond-broking application had infringed the copyright in the claimant's program. The defendants were ex-employees of the claimant and had used an earlier version of the claimant's program as a reference for their own application. The court also found that the defendants had copied a small portion (3.3 percent) of the claimant's code into the defendants' own program. The judge held on the facts that there had been specific inst.
Just Intellectuals Newsletter (March 2017 ed)Kristy Downing
The Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Life Technologies v. Promega regarding the interpretation of "substantial portion" under 35 USC §271(f)(1). The Court held that (1) "substantial portion" refers to a quantitative, not qualitative, measure and (2) exporting a single component is insufficient to create liability without being tailored for infringement under §271(f)(2). However, the Court did not specify how many components would need to be exported to be considered a "substantial portion."
ReferencesKahnke, R. E., Bundy, K. L., & Long, R. J. (2015). Key.docxsodhi3
References
Kahnke, R. E., Bundy, K. L., & Long, R. J. (2015). Key Developments in Trade Secrets Litigation. Business Torts Journal, 22(2), 7-12.
<!--Additional Information:
Persistent link to this record (Permalink): https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=102831068&site=eds-live&scope=site
End of citation-->
Key Developments in Trade Secrets Litigation
ARTICLES
Keywords: litigation; business torts; trade secrets; damages; patents; Defend Trade Secrets Act; Trade Secrets Protection Act
Trade secrets continue to increase in importance as companies and the U.S. government are focusing attention on their value and protection. This past year has brought a number of significant developments in trade secrets law. In this article, we highlight five of them: (1) the need to protect trade secrets during litigation, and the potential consequences of not doing so (i.e., the DuPont reversal); (2) the growing importance of specifically identifying trade secrets early in litigation; (3) the narrowing of patentable subject matter for software and the alternative of trade secret protection; (4) increasing support for passage of a federal civil trade secrets law; and (5) the continuing trend toward large damages awards and settlements in trade secrets cases.
The Reversal of a Massive Verdict on the Basis of Disclosure in Prior Litigation
When discussing reasonable efforts to protect trade secrets, the discussion typically focuses on the efforts taken by the company during its normal course of business. Equally important, however, are the reasonable efforts taken to protect trade secrets during litigation. Unsealed filings and public presentations in the course of past litigation can lead to a finding that the "trade secret" in question is no longer secret in future litigation, costing clients massive judgments. Such was the case in E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co. v. Kolon Industries, Inc., 564 F. App'x 710, 714 (4th Cir. 2014).
In DuPont, the Fourth Circuit reversed a nearly $1 billion jury verdict on the basis of the lower court's evidentiary ruling. DuPont sued Kolon under the Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act, alleging that Kolon hired former DuPont employees in an effort to acquire its trade secrets related to the production of Kevlar, a proprietary DuPont product. At trial, Kolon intended to introduce evidence showing that a number of the alleged trade secrets at issue in the case involved publicly available information. Specifically, Kolon sought to demonstrate that DuPont had disclosed the trade secrets in the course of a 1980s intellectual property litigation between DuPont and a competitor called AkzoNobel.
According to Kolon, the Akzo litigation was a "widely publicized patent dispute" in which DuPont "disclosed vast amounts of technical information about the Kevlar manufacturing process-beyond its patent disclosures-in open court and public filings." Kolon contended that 42 of the 149 trad ...
The document discusses recent developments in patent law regarding software and business methods in the US, UK, and Europe. It summarizes the US Federal Circuit's "machine-or-transformation" test established in In re Bilski, questions referred to the European Patent Office regarding software patentability, and similarities and differences between the laws in various jurisdictions. The key developments are:
1) The US Federal Circuit adopted the "machine-or-transformation" test for determining patent eligibility of software and business methods.
2) The UK Court of Appeal sought to harmonize UK and European law by taking a broader view of software patentability.
3) The European Patent Office president referred questions to the Enlarged Board of
This document discusses conflict of laws in intellectual property rights (IPR). It begins by defining IPR and explaining why states create laws to protect intellectual creations through monopoly rights for creators. As technology has reduced national boundaries, courts increasingly face conflicts between IPR laws of different countries. Private international law is important because IPR issues now extend beyond nations. The principle of territoriality and its absence in today's globalized world can create conflicts. The document examines jurisdictional roles and choices of law in resolving international IPR disputes.
This document explains the issues associated with obtaining software patent authorization by the United States Patent and Trademark Office as a result of the SCOTUS decision in Alice Corporation versus CLS Bank International.
This document summarizes an article that examines the validity of intellectual property (IP) carve-outs in arbitration clauses in light of recent legal developments. It discusses how IP carve-outs are commonly used to exclude IP issues from arbitration, but cites justifications for this are weakening. Recent court rulings have made interim injunctions in IP disputes more difficult to obtain, and separating IP issues from other contractual issues is challenging, leading to prolonged disputes. Additionally, arbitration institutions have strengthened rules for interim relief in IP matters. Therefore, the document concludes IP carve-outs may not provide intended benefits and add unnecessary costs and delays.
Presented at Kansas City Bar Association on October 23, 2018 by John Bednarz during CLE: Patent Law Update, Recent Subject Matter Eligibility Decisions and Trends at the USPTO.
This document discusses the patentability of computer software and business methods. It begins by defining software and describing source code and object code. It then discusses copyright protection for software internationally and in Europe. While software is protected by copyright, patents provide broader protection for the functional aspects and ideas behind software. The document outlines various tests used in different jurisdictions to determine what is an unpatentable "idea" versus patentable expression. It also discusses the expansion of patentable subject matter in the US to include business methods and algorithms following cases like State Street. However, more recent cases have made patentability a higher bar. The rising costs of patent trolls is also addressed.
Just Intellectuals Newsletter (March 2017 ed)Kristy Downing
The Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Life Technologies v. Promega regarding the interpretation of "substantial portion" under 35 USC §271(f)(1). The Court held that (1) "substantial portion" refers to a quantitative, not qualitative, measure and (2) exporting a single component is insufficient to create liability without being tailored for infringement under §271(f)(2). However, the Court did not specify how many components would need to be exported to be considered a "substantial portion."
ReferencesKahnke, R. E., Bundy, K. L., & Long, R. J. (2015). Key.docxsodhi3
References
Kahnke, R. E., Bundy, K. L., & Long, R. J. (2015). Key Developments in Trade Secrets Litigation. Business Torts Journal, 22(2), 7-12.
<!--Additional Information:
Persistent link to this record (Permalink): https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=102831068&site=eds-live&scope=site
End of citation-->
Key Developments in Trade Secrets Litigation
ARTICLES
Keywords: litigation; business torts; trade secrets; damages; patents; Defend Trade Secrets Act; Trade Secrets Protection Act
Trade secrets continue to increase in importance as companies and the U.S. government are focusing attention on their value and protection. This past year has brought a number of significant developments in trade secrets law. In this article, we highlight five of them: (1) the need to protect trade secrets during litigation, and the potential consequences of not doing so (i.e., the DuPont reversal); (2) the growing importance of specifically identifying trade secrets early in litigation; (3) the narrowing of patentable subject matter for software and the alternative of trade secret protection; (4) increasing support for passage of a federal civil trade secrets law; and (5) the continuing trend toward large damages awards and settlements in trade secrets cases.
The Reversal of a Massive Verdict on the Basis of Disclosure in Prior Litigation
When discussing reasonable efforts to protect trade secrets, the discussion typically focuses on the efforts taken by the company during its normal course of business. Equally important, however, are the reasonable efforts taken to protect trade secrets during litigation. Unsealed filings and public presentations in the course of past litigation can lead to a finding that the "trade secret" in question is no longer secret in future litigation, costing clients massive judgments. Such was the case in E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co. v. Kolon Industries, Inc., 564 F. App'x 710, 714 (4th Cir. 2014).
In DuPont, the Fourth Circuit reversed a nearly $1 billion jury verdict on the basis of the lower court's evidentiary ruling. DuPont sued Kolon under the Virginia Uniform Trade Secrets Act, alleging that Kolon hired former DuPont employees in an effort to acquire its trade secrets related to the production of Kevlar, a proprietary DuPont product. At trial, Kolon intended to introduce evidence showing that a number of the alleged trade secrets at issue in the case involved publicly available information. Specifically, Kolon sought to demonstrate that DuPont had disclosed the trade secrets in the course of a 1980s intellectual property litigation between DuPont and a competitor called AkzoNobel.
According to Kolon, the Akzo litigation was a "widely publicized patent dispute" in which DuPont "disclosed vast amounts of technical information about the Kevlar manufacturing process-beyond its patent disclosures-in open court and public filings." Kolon contended that 42 of the 149 trad ...
The document discusses recent developments in patent law regarding software and business methods in the US, UK, and Europe. It summarizes the US Federal Circuit's "machine-or-transformation" test established in In re Bilski, questions referred to the European Patent Office regarding software patentability, and similarities and differences between the laws in various jurisdictions. The key developments are:
1) The US Federal Circuit adopted the "machine-or-transformation" test for determining patent eligibility of software and business methods.
2) The UK Court of Appeal sought to harmonize UK and European law by taking a broader view of software patentability.
3) The European Patent Office president referred questions to the Enlarged Board of
This document discusses conflict of laws in intellectual property rights (IPR). It begins by defining IPR and explaining why states create laws to protect intellectual creations through monopoly rights for creators. As technology has reduced national boundaries, courts increasingly face conflicts between IPR laws of different countries. Private international law is important because IPR issues now extend beyond nations. The principle of territoriality and its absence in today's globalized world can create conflicts. The document examines jurisdictional roles and choices of law in resolving international IPR disputes.
This document explains the issues associated with obtaining software patent authorization by the United States Patent and Trademark Office as a result of the SCOTUS decision in Alice Corporation versus CLS Bank International.
This document summarizes an article that examines the validity of intellectual property (IP) carve-outs in arbitration clauses in light of recent legal developments. It discusses how IP carve-outs are commonly used to exclude IP issues from arbitration, but cites justifications for this are weakening. Recent court rulings have made interim injunctions in IP disputes more difficult to obtain, and separating IP issues from other contractual issues is challenging, leading to prolonged disputes. Additionally, arbitration institutions have strengthened rules for interim relief in IP matters. Therefore, the document concludes IP carve-outs may not provide intended benefits and add unnecessary costs and delays.
Presented at Kansas City Bar Association on October 23, 2018 by John Bednarz during CLE: Patent Law Update, Recent Subject Matter Eligibility Decisions and Trends at the USPTO.
This document discusses the patentability of computer software and business methods. It begins by defining software and describing source code and object code. It then discusses copyright protection for software internationally and in Europe. While software is protected by copyright, patents provide broader protection for the functional aspects and ideas behind software. The document outlines various tests used in different jurisdictions to determine what is an unpatentable "idea" versus patentable expression. It also discusses the expansion of patentable subject matter in the US to include business methods and algorithms following cases like State Street. However, more recent cases have made patentability a higher bar. The rising costs of patent trolls is also addressed.
The document discusses how the U.S. patent system has struggled to balance patent rights and preventing abuse. Recent legislation and court rulings aimed to curb frivolous lawsuits led to concerns the system favored accused infringers over patent owners. However, new court decisions indicate the pendulum may be shifting back toward balance, finding the right amount of power for both patent owners and accused infringers.
Drafting software development contracts governed by U.S. law - Andriy KavatsyukUBA-komitet
Засідання Комітету АПУ з питань телекомунікацій, інформаційних технологій та Інтернету і комітету IT-права Lviv IT Cluster «Особливості укладення зовнішньо-економічних договорів у сегменті ІТ», 14 травня 2016 року, м. Львів
AI copyright notice by USA Copyright Office (March 10, 2023)Simone Aliprandi
Copyright Registration Guidance: Works Containing Material Generated by Artificial Intelligence (document published on March 10, 2023 by the USA Copyright Office)
COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENTWhen a copyright holder pursues a party th.docxmaxinesmith73660
COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
When a copyright holder pursues a party that it believes has infringed on its copyright, the
aggrieved party will generally pursue one of three theories of infringement. These theories
have been developed by the federal courts to sort out the various ways by which one could
infringe upon a copyright. These theories are direct, indirect (also known as contributory ),
or vicarious infringement.
Direct Infringement
Direct infringement occurs when the copyright owner can prove legal ownership of the
work in question and that the infringer copied the work without permission. While the
first element is straightforward, the second element is more complex than appears at first
glance. In the context of the copyright protections afforded by law, it is clear that the word
copied must have an expansive definition rather than a narrow one (i.e., copy means more
than an exact replica). At the same time, of course, the definition cannot be so expansive as
to foreclose any works of the same category.
Courts have developed the substantial similarity standard to guide the definition of
copy under copyright laws. Thus, a copyright holder need only prove that the infringer
copied plots, structures, and/or organizations that made the infringing work substantially
similar to the copyrighted work.
Indirect Infringement
Indirect infringement (also known as contributory infringement ) involves three parties:
the copyright owner, the direct infringer, and the facilitator of the infringement.
The theory of indirect infringement is one that holds the facilitator liable for damages.
Therefore, before pursuing a theory of indirect infringement, the copyright owner must
identify the direct infringer. Normally, in order for the facilitator to be liable, the party
must have knowledge (direct or imputed) of the infringement and/or contribute to the
infringement in some material way. In the famous case of A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster,
Inc., 11 a federal appeals court held that Napster’s business model of facilitating a peerto-
peer community for sharing of digital music files constituted contributory infringement
because Napster had the ability to locate infringing material listed on its searchengines and the right to terminate users’ access to the system. Digital file sharing is
discussed more extensively later in this section (see Legal Implications in Cyberspace:
Copyrights in the Digital Age).
Vicarious Infringement
The final copyright infringement theory, vicarious infringement, is similar to the indirect
infringement theory in that they both involve third parties not involved in actual direct
infringement. Vicarious liability is based on agency law (see Chapter 10, “Agency and
Employment Relationships”) and can be used as a theory of liability when the infringing
party (the agent) is acting on behalf of or to the benefit of another party (the principal).
In that case, the principal party is said to be vicariously liable. The copyright owner will
b.
This document proposes a "Common Stock Theory" test for determining patent eligibility. It begins by discussing the U.S. court case In re Petrus A.C.M. Nuijten, which dealt with patent eligibility of a signal encoding technique. The document then lays out the foundations and principles of the proposed Common Stock Theory test, which is intended to provide a consistent methodology for determining patent eligibility grounded in fundamental patent law principles. The theory is based on Jeffersonian philosophy around encouraging innovation and the expanding scope of patent eligibility established in court cases like Diamond v. Chakrabarty.
The document discusses the doctrine of equivalents in patent law. The doctrine allows a court to find infringement even if the accused device does not literally infringe a patent claim, if it is equivalent to the claimed invention. It provides that an equivalent device performs substantially the same function in substantially the same way to achieve substantially the same result. The doctrine balances protecting patent holders' inventions with providing clear notice of a patent's scope.
The document summarizes the Supreme Court's 2010 decision in Bilski v. Kappos regarding business method patents. The Court ruled that the "machine-or-transformation" test was not the sole test for determining patent eligibility but was still a useful tool. However, four justices would have banned business method patents altogether. The Court provided little additional guidance and left many questions unanswered, ensuring further debate around the patent eligibility of software, business methods, and other technologies. Litigators are expected to increasingly challenge such patents based on subject matter eligibility and obviousness.
FINAL SBOT 2015 Advanced IP INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW WORKSHOPWei Wei Jeang
This document summarizes an intellectual property law workshop presentation on patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101 given by Wei Wei Jeang. The summary discusses key Supreme Court cases like Alice, Mayo, Bilski, Diehr that have shaped the patent eligibility landscape. It also reviews the USPTO's 2014 interim eligibility guidance, which outlines a two-step analysis for determining eligibility including whether the claims are directed to an abstract idea and whether there is an inventive concept.
This document discusses the history of patent law regarding living organisms, biotechnology, software, and computer processes. It provides an overview of several important court cases that helped establish whether these types of innovations could be patented or not. The document examines the distinction between discoveries/ideas versus novel processes/products, and how courts have evaluated patents in these complex technical fields over time.
This document discusses the copyright fair use defense. It explains that copyright laws were designed to protect creative works while also allowing for limited use of those works under the fair use doctrine. The fair use doctrine is analyzed using the four factors in US copyright law: (1) the purpose and commercial nature of the use, (2) the nature of the copyrighted work, (3) the amount of the work used, and (4) the effect on the work's potential market. Common examples of fair use are commentary, criticism, and parody, with parody being given wide leeway by courts even if commercial. A landmark parody case established that fair use must be decided on a case-by-case basis considering the four factors.
The Federal Circuit Review is a monthly newsletter featuring the latest case summaries handed down from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
In this Issue:
• Double Patenting Applies With Distinct Inventive Entities
• Inducement Judgment Remanded in Light of Akamai
• First Sale Doctrine Applies to Sales Made Abroad
This document provides an overview of copyright protection for computer programs and software under Irish and EU law. Some key points covered include:
- Copyright automatically protects original software and computer programs without any formal registration. Protection lasts for the author's lifetime plus 70 years.
- While ideas and functionality cannot be copyrighted, the specific code and expression can be. Reproducing all or substantial parts of a program is infringement.
- Employers own the copyright for works created by employees within the scope of their employment.
- Temporary copies made during normal use of a program, such as loading into RAM, are allowed under copyright law. Other provisions address error correction, backup copies, and caching.
- Reverse engineering
Copyright Protection of a Software as a Work with Functional ElementsJan Lindberg
Presentation held on 6th November 2015 in ITechLaw's European Conference in London where I led ITechLaw's IP Committee's workshop. We discussed the recent decisions affecting protection of functional elements of computer programs via copyright in light of SAS v. WPL and Oracle v. Google cases, as well as the related Finnish case law. In this interactive session we covered copyright protection for functionalities in computer programs, programming languages, interfaces, and several other interesting topics comparing EU and US regimes, also covering right to contractually limit information in public domain in IT sector and other fields. Statements were intentionally provocative to facilitate discussions so these do not necessarily represent my personal views.
The document discusses several key legal aspects and issues related to digital forensics. It outlines how digital forensics experts must consider existing laws when monitoring and collecting computer evidence. It also explains that proving possession of prohibited digital materials found on a computer involves establishing knowledge and control, which can be challenging. Additionally, it notes that electronic discovery and digital forensics both involve preserving and analyzing digital information, but that digital forensics experts perform the analysis while electronic discovery experts provide information to legal teams for analysis.
This article examines how US courts have interpreted the essential facilities doctrine in competition law cases. The doctrine generally holds that an entity controlling a facility essential for competition must provide access to competitors on reasonable terms. However, US courts have applied the doctrine very narrowly. To succeed, plaintiffs must show the defendant's denial of access completely eliminates competition, not just provides advantages. Courts also reject claims if competitors can achieve some market share without the facility or can reasonably duplicate it. The author analyzes relevant US case law and concludes courts are reluctant to use the essential facilities doctrine to require sharing intellectual property. A similarly narrow interpretation may be emerging in the EU as well.
An initial examination of computer programs as creative works.pdfLisa Muthukumar
This study examined whether computer programs can be considered creative works. The researchers collected programs written by 23 advanced graduate students to solve simple and complex bioinformatics problems. The programs were assessed for variability of expression using a new measurement called the Program Control and Descriptive Variables assessment. They were also evaluated for elements of creativity using a modified version of Cropley and Kaufman's Creative Solution Diagnosis Scale. For the complex problem, programs showed higher ratings of propulsion-genesis and problematization and there was more variability between solutions. This suggests computer programs demonstrate qualities of creative works like other creative products, with complexity influencing the level of creativity. The study provides initial evidence that computer programs count as creative works.
The document discusses intellectual property, copyright, and related legal issues. It provides an overview of what is covered by copyright, including economic rights like reproduction and distribution rights, as well as moral rights of attribution and integrity. It outlines recent changes and developments in copyright law through international agreements and legislation in Australia. Current legal cases involving internet piracy and fair use of headlines are also summarized. Alternative approaches to copyright like copyleft and Creative Commons are mentioned.
The document discusses intellectual property law in California. It summarizes that Congress has the power to establish patent and copyright laws, while states can pass additional laws to protect intellectual property. California specifically allows for actions related to conversion, misappropriation, and breach of contract regarding intellectual property. The document also discusses how the California Attorney General's office investigates antitrust cases involving intellectual property and prosecutes intellectual property crimes.
Summarize the key ideas of each of these texts and explain how they .docxrafbolet0
Summarize the key ideas of each of these texts and explain how they shed light on our study of American religious diversity. Point out some key citations and explain the most important thing you learned from these readings and how these readings helped you achieve the educational goals of our course
US Bill of Rights, UN DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, and UNESCO on Diversity and Tolerance; Dignitatis Humanae, and Nostra Aetate
Clash of civilizations, Civil Religion (Reader, pp288-289), and Dominus Iesus
Dynamics of Prejudice (Reader, pp.32-39; 111-114; 295-309)
“Die Judenfrage” (Reader, pp.178-209)
The Irish case (Reader, pp.169-177)
Idolatry (Cantwell Smith, Reader, pp.259-266) and Tolerant Gods ( by Wole Soyinka, text on moodle)
Sacred Texts, Christian and Islamic vision of Religious Tolerance (Reader, p.44, and moodle)
The Real Kant, Multiculturalism, Eurocentrism and the Columbus paradigm (Reader, pp.93-103; 352-358; and pp.282-289)
“Calore-Colore” Paradigm (Reader, pp. 323-346) and scholarship on ATR, and scientific theories or mythologies of otherness (pp, 111-128; 295-346)
AAR article on Egyptology and “Egypt and Israel”
Choose 3 questions from the list above :
the papers should be clear and professonal, answer questions and explain the points that you wants to explain with examples from SACRED TEXTS (BIBLE AND KORAN). I want the writer to do the papers professionally, and to be neutral and non-racist, I want him explain that the examples of the Koran show the positive side, which is commensurate with the topic you will write, And, if possible, that there is a positive similarity between the Koran and the Bible. I already provide additional file can help the writer and you can looking for Koran and Bible to use it
.
Submit, individually, different kinds of data breaches, the threats .docxrafbolet0
This document provides instructions for an assignment to submit a paper analyzing different types of data breaches, the threats that enable them, and their severity. The paper should be APA formatted with 1-inch margins, consistent font, and double spacing, include a 1-page title page, 2-3 pages of body text, and a 1-page references section.
More Related Content
Similar to Source Code, Object Code, and The Da Vinci Code The Debate on Int.docx
The document discusses how the U.S. patent system has struggled to balance patent rights and preventing abuse. Recent legislation and court rulings aimed to curb frivolous lawsuits led to concerns the system favored accused infringers over patent owners. However, new court decisions indicate the pendulum may be shifting back toward balance, finding the right amount of power for both patent owners and accused infringers.
Drafting software development contracts governed by U.S. law - Andriy KavatsyukUBA-komitet
Засідання Комітету АПУ з питань телекомунікацій, інформаційних технологій та Інтернету і комітету IT-права Lviv IT Cluster «Особливості укладення зовнішньо-економічних договорів у сегменті ІТ», 14 травня 2016 року, м. Львів
AI copyright notice by USA Copyright Office (March 10, 2023)Simone Aliprandi
Copyright Registration Guidance: Works Containing Material Generated by Artificial Intelligence (document published on March 10, 2023 by the USA Copyright Office)
COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENTWhen a copyright holder pursues a party th.docxmaxinesmith73660
COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT
When a copyright holder pursues a party that it believes has infringed on its copyright, the
aggrieved party will generally pursue one of three theories of infringement. These theories
have been developed by the federal courts to sort out the various ways by which one could
infringe upon a copyright. These theories are direct, indirect (also known as contributory ),
or vicarious infringement.
Direct Infringement
Direct infringement occurs when the copyright owner can prove legal ownership of the
work in question and that the infringer copied the work without permission. While the
first element is straightforward, the second element is more complex than appears at first
glance. In the context of the copyright protections afforded by law, it is clear that the word
copied must have an expansive definition rather than a narrow one (i.e., copy means more
than an exact replica). At the same time, of course, the definition cannot be so expansive as
to foreclose any works of the same category.
Courts have developed the substantial similarity standard to guide the definition of
copy under copyright laws. Thus, a copyright holder need only prove that the infringer
copied plots, structures, and/or organizations that made the infringing work substantially
similar to the copyrighted work.
Indirect Infringement
Indirect infringement (also known as contributory infringement ) involves three parties:
the copyright owner, the direct infringer, and the facilitator of the infringement.
The theory of indirect infringement is one that holds the facilitator liable for damages.
Therefore, before pursuing a theory of indirect infringement, the copyright owner must
identify the direct infringer. Normally, in order for the facilitator to be liable, the party
must have knowledge (direct or imputed) of the infringement and/or contribute to the
infringement in some material way. In the famous case of A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster,
Inc., 11 a federal appeals court held that Napster’s business model of facilitating a peerto-
peer community for sharing of digital music files constituted contributory infringement
because Napster had the ability to locate infringing material listed on its searchengines and the right to terminate users’ access to the system. Digital file sharing is
discussed more extensively later in this section (see Legal Implications in Cyberspace:
Copyrights in the Digital Age).
Vicarious Infringement
The final copyright infringement theory, vicarious infringement, is similar to the indirect
infringement theory in that they both involve third parties not involved in actual direct
infringement. Vicarious liability is based on agency law (see Chapter 10, “Agency and
Employment Relationships”) and can be used as a theory of liability when the infringing
party (the agent) is acting on behalf of or to the benefit of another party (the principal).
In that case, the principal party is said to be vicariously liable. The copyright owner will
b.
This document proposes a "Common Stock Theory" test for determining patent eligibility. It begins by discussing the U.S. court case In re Petrus A.C.M. Nuijten, which dealt with patent eligibility of a signal encoding technique. The document then lays out the foundations and principles of the proposed Common Stock Theory test, which is intended to provide a consistent methodology for determining patent eligibility grounded in fundamental patent law principles. The theory is based on Jeffersonian philosophy around encouraging innovation and the expanding scope of patent eligibility established in court cases like Diamond v. Chakrabarty.
The document discusses the doctrine of equivalents in patent law. The doctrine allows a court to find infringement even if the accused device does not literally infringe a patent claim, if it is equivalent to the claimed invention. It provides that an equivalent device performs substantially the same function in substantially the same way to achieve substantially the same result. The doctrine balances protecting patent holders' inventions with providing clear notice of a patent's scope.
The document summarizes the Supreme Court's 2010 decision in Bilski v. Kappos regarding business method patents. The Court ruled that the "machine-or-transformation" test was not the sole test for determining patent eligibility but was still a useful tool. However, four justices would have banned business method patents altogether. The Court provided little additional guidance and left many questions unanswered, ensuring further debate around the patent eligibility of software, business methods, and other technologies. Litigators are expected to increasingly challenge such patents based on subject matter eligibility and obviousness.
FINAL SBOT 2015 Advanced IP INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW WORKSHOPWei Wei Jeang
This document summarizes an intellectual property law workshop presentation on patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101 given by Wei Wei Jeang. The summary discusses key Supreme Court cases like Alice, Mayo, Bilski, Diehr that have shaped the patent eligibility landscape. It also reviews the USPTO's 2014 interim eligibility guidance, which outlines a two-step analysis for determining eligibility including whether the claims are directed to an abstract idea and whether there is an inventive concept.
This document discusses the history of patent law regarding living organisms, biotechnology, software, and computer processes. It provides an overview of several important court cases that helped establish whether these types of innovations could be patented or not. The document examines the distinction between discoveries/ideas versus novel processes/products, and how courts have evaluated patents in these complex technical fields over time.
This document discusses the copyright fair use defense. It explains that copyright laws were designed to protect creative works while also allowing for limited use of those works under the fair use doctrine. The fair use doctrine is analyzed using the four factors in US copyright law: (1) the purpose and commercial nature of the use, (2) the nature of the copyrighted work, (3) the amount of the work used, and (4) the effect on the work's potential market. Common examples of fair use are commentary, criticism, and parody, with parody being given wide leeway by courts even if commercial. A landmark parody case established that fair use must be decided on a case-by-case basis considering the four factors.
The Federal Circuit Review is a monthly newsletter featuring the latest case summaries handed down from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
In this Issue:
• Double Patenting Applies With Distinct Inventive Entities
• Inducement Judgment Remanded in Light of Akamai
• First Sale Doctrine Applies to Sales Made Abroad
This document provides an overview of copyright protection for computer programs and software under Irish and EU law. Some key points covered include:
- Copyright automatically protects original software and computer programs without any formal registration. Protection lasts for the author's lifetime plus 70 years.
- While ideas and functionality cannot be copyrighted, the specific code and expression can be. Reproducing all or substantial parts of a program is infringement.
- Employers own the copyright for works created by employees within the scope of their employment.
- Temporary copies made during normal use of a program, such as loading into RAM, are allowed under copyright law. Other provisions address error correction, backup copies, and caching.
- Reverse engineering
Copyright Protection of a Software as a Work with Functional ElementsJan Lindberg
Presentation held on 6th November 2015 in ITechLaw's European Conference in London where I led ITechLaw's IP Committee's workshop. We discussed the recent decisions affecting protection of functional elements of computer programs via copyright in light of SAS v. WPL and Oracle v. Google cases, as well as the related Finnish case law. In this interactive session we covered copyright protection for functionalities in computer programs, programming languages, interfaces, and several other interesting topics comparing EU and US regimes, also covering right to contractually limit information in public domain in IT sector and other fields. Statements were intentionally provocative to facilitate discussions so these do not necessarily represent my personal views.
The document discusses several key legal aspects and issues related to digital forensics. It outlines how digital forensics experts must consider existing laws when monitoring and collecting computer evidence. It also explains that proving possession of prohibited digital materials found on a computer involves establishing knowledge and control, which can be challenging. Additionally, it notes that electronic discovery and digital forensics both involve preserving and analyzing digital information, but that digital forensics experts perform the analysis while electronic discovery experts provide information to legal teams for analysis.
This article examines how US courts have interpreted the essential facilities doctrine in competition law cases. The doctrine generally holds that an entity controlling a facility essential for competition must provide access to competitors on reasonable terms. However, US courts have applied the doctrine very narrowly. To succeed, plaintiffs must show the defendant's denial of access completely eliminates competition, not just provides advantages. Courts also reject claims if competitors can achieve some market share without the facility or can reasonably duplicate it. The author analyzes relevant US case law and concludes courts are reluctant to use the essential facilities doctrine to require sharing intellectual property. A similarly narrow interpretation may be emerging in the EU as well.
An initial examination of computer programs as creative works.pdfLisa Muthukumar
This study examined whether computer programs can be considered creative works. The researchers collected programs written by 23 advanced graduate students to solve simple and complex bioinformatics problems. The programs were assessed for variability of expression using a new measurement called the Program Control and Descriptive Variables assessment. They were also evaluated for elements of creativity using a modified version of Cropley and Kaufman's Creative Solution Diagnosis Scale. For the complex problem, programs showed higher ratings of propulsion-genesis and problematization and there was more variability between solutions. This suggests computer programs demonstrate qualities of creative works like other creative products, with complexity influencing the level of creativity. The study provides initial evidence that computer programs count as creative works.
The document discusses intellectual property, copyright, and related legal issues. It provides an overview of what is covered by copyright, including economic rights like reproduction and distribution rights, as well as moral rights of attribution and integrity. It outlines recent changes and developments in copyright law through international agreements and legislation in Australia. Current legal cases involving internet piracy and fair use of headlines are also summarized. Alternative approaches to copyright like copyleft and Creative Commons are mentioned.
The document discusses intellectual property law in California. It summarizes that Congress has the power to establish patent and copyright laws, while states can pass additional laws to protect intellectual property. California specifically allows for actions related to conversion, misappropriation, and breach of contract regarding intellectual property. The document also discusses how the California Attorney General's office investigates antitrust cases involving intellectual property and prosecutes intellectual property crimes.
Similar to Source Code, Object Code, and The Da Vinci Code The Debate on Int.docx (20)
Summarize the key ideas of each of these texts and explain how they .docxrafbolet0
Summarize the key ideas of each of these texts and explain how they shed light on our study of American religious diversity. Point out some key citations and explain the most important thing you learned from these readings and how these readings helped you achieve the educational goals of our course
US Bill of Rights, UN DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, and UNESCO on Diversity and Tolerance; Dignitatis Humanae, and Nostra Aetate
Clash of civilizations, Civil Religion (Reader, pp288-289), and Dominus Iesus
Dynamics of Prejudice (Reader, pp.32-39; 111-114; 295-309)
“Die Judenfrage” (Reader, pp.178-209)
The Irish case (Reader, pp.169-177)
Idolatry (Cantwell Smith, Reader, pp.259-266) and Tolerant Gods ( by Wole Soyinka, text on moodle)
Sacred Texts, Christian and Islamic vision of Religious Tolerance (Reader, p.44, and moodle)
The Real Kant, Multiculturalism, Eurocentrism and the Columbus paradigm (Reader, pp.93-103; 352-358; and pp.282-289)
“Calore-Colore” Paradigm (Reader, pp. 323-346) and scholarship on ATR, and scientific theories or mythologies of otherness (pp, 111-128; 295-346)
AAR article on Egyptology and “Egypt and Israel”
Choose 3 questions from the list above :
the papers should be clear and professonal, answer questions and explain the points that you wants to explain with examples from SACRED TEXTS (BIBLE AND KORAN). I want the writer to do the papers professionally, and to be neutral and non-racist, I want him explain that the examples of the Koran show the positive side, which is commensurate with the topic you will write, And, if possible, that there is a positive similarity between the Koran and the Bible. I already provide additional file can help the writer and you can looking for Koran and Bible to use it
.
Submit, individually, different kinds of data breaches, the threats .docxrafbolet0
This document provides instructions for an assignment to submit a paper analyzing different types of data breaches, the threats that enable them, and their severity. The paper should be APA formatted with 1-inch margins, consistent font, and double spacing, include a 1-page title page, 2-3 pages of body text, and a 1-page references section.
Submit your personal crimes analysis using Microsoft® PowerPoi.docxrafbolet0
Submit
your personal crimes analysis using Microsoft
®
PowerPoint
®
or another pre-approved presentation tool.
Create
a 10- to 15-slide presentation that includes a reference slide with at least four references cited throughout the presentation. Include the following:
·
Differentiate between assault, battery, and mayhem.
·
Identify and explain kidnapping and false imprisonment.
·
Compare and contrast between rape and statutory rape.
·
Choose two states and compare the definitions and punishment for these crimes.
Include
appropriate photos, short videos, or headlines, as needed, to represent your analysis.
Format
your presentation consistent with APA guidelines.
.
Submit two pages (double spaced, 12 point font) describing a musical.docxrafbolet0
Submit two pages (double spaced, 12 point font) describing a musical concert of your choosing, suggested in the syllabus or approved by instructor. Describe as many factors as possible: who/what/where/ when, how many musicians performed, what instruments did they play, name several of the musical pieces, how did they sound (use some of the terms we learned in the course), what did the musicians wear, describe the audience, describe the music (how did it make you feel, etc.), what did you enjoy most about the event? Share your reflections.
.
Submit the rough draft of your geology project. Included in your rou.docxrafbolet0
Submit the rough draft of your geology project. Included in your rough draft should be the text as close as possible to the way you intend on submitting it as well as data tables and rough sketches of figures.
Proofread everything and check your work according to the
Evaluation
guidelines in the original assignment in Week 02.
Geology Project Requirements
**Please review your paper for all of the below before submitting your Week 8 Rough Draft or Week 10 Final Paper.**
-
Length
·
Paper is to be 7 pages, at a minimum, in length:
o
One Cover Page
o
One Reference page
o
5 pages of written text (which does not include space taken up by photos, illustrations or charts).
-
Formatting
·
All paragraphs need to be indented.
·
Font should be Times New Roman and size 12.
·
The line spacing should be double spaced.
·
Make sure there is an introduction paragraph, thebody paragraphs are well organized and a conclusion paragraph.
·
Stay away from many short sentences in a paragraph, as the paragraph needs to flow. (These can be fragment sentences and can make the paper confusing when reading.)
·
Also stay away from many short paragraphs in the body of the paper, if organized well, then there will be medium length paragraphs.
·
Paper should be aligned to the left margin – not center or wide across.
-
Writing
·
This is a science research paper about a geology topic and must be in third person, therefore words such as we, me, I you, our, or us are not allowed to be used. Make sure these are not in your paper.
o
This also pertains to let’s. (Let’s short for let us.)
·
Make sure that all of your sentences are strong and independent.
·
Paper needs to be written using proper mechanics (clear, concise, complete sentences and paragraphs), proper spelling, grammar and punctuation.
·
Do not start your introduction or paper off with ‘This paper will look at…’ or ‘This paper will cover…’ Your thesis should not contain these words and should be a stand alone sentence with a passive lead in.
·
Spell Check Spell Check Spell Check.
·
Any introduction of a new word or scientific word that your reader may not know the definition of, be sure to include the definition for better understanding.
·
Acronyms. The first time an acronym is used, be sure to define what it stands for – such as USGS (United States Geological Survey). Then each subsequent time this acronym is used in the paper, you can just write USGS since it has already been defined to the reader.
·
Make sure to capitalize proper nouns such as Earth.
·
Make sure paragraphs transition and flow well between each other. Read the paper out loud to yourself before final submission to make sure these transitions are in place.
·
Please do not be a casual writer in this paper. What I mean by that is do not write how you would talk in a casual conversation, text on your phone or email a friend. This is a research paper and therefore the presentation and writing style needs to be.
Submit your paper of Sections III and IV of the final project. Spe.docxrafbolet0
Submit your paper of Sections III and IV of the final project. Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed:
III. Billing and Reimbursement
A. Analyze the collection of data by patient access personnel and its importance to the billing and collection process. Be sure to address the importance of exceptional customer service.
B. Analyze how third-party policies would be used when developing billing guidelines for patient financial services (PFS) personnel and administration when determining the payer mix for maximum reimbursement.
C. Organize the key areas of review in order of importance for timeliness and maximization of reimbursement from third-party payers. Explain your rationale on the order.
D. Describe a way to structure your follow-up staff in terms of effectiveness. How can you ensure that this structure will be effective?
E. Develop a plan for periodic review of procedures to ensure compliance. Include explicit steps for this plan and the feasibility of enacting this plan within this organization.
IV. Marketing and Reimbursement
A. Analyze the strategies used to negotiate new managed care contracts. Support your analysis with research.
B. Communicate the important role that each individual within this healthcare organization plays with regard to managed care contracts. Be sure to include the different individuals within the healthcare organization.
C. Explain how new managed care contracts impact reimbursement for the healthcare organization. Support your explanation with concrete evidence or research.
D. Discuss the resources needed to ensure billing and coding compliance with regulations and ethical standards. What would happen if these resources were not obtained? Describe the consequences of noncompliance with regulations and ethical standards.
.
Submit the finished product for your Geology Project. Please include.docxrafbolet0
Submit the finished product for your Geology Project. Please include all figures, data tables, and text in the same document.
Before you submit, please proofread once more as you check the
Evaluation
guidelines from the original assignment in Week 02.
I need the sources in-text citations please and sources throughout the paper with quotation marks!!! THIS IS NECESSARY. I have the rough draft I can send it.
Geology Project Requirements
**Please review your paper for all of the below before submitting your Week 10 Final Paper.**
-
Length
·
Paper is to be 7 pages, at a minimum, in length:
o
One Cover Page
o
One Reference page
o
5 pages of written text (which does not include space taken up by photos, illustrations or charts).
-
Formatting
·
All paragraphs need to be indented.
·
Font should be Times New Roman and size 12.
·
The line spacing should be double spaced.
·
Make sure there is an introduction paragraph, the body paragraphs are well organized and a conclusion paragraph.
·
Stay away from many short sentences in a paragraph, as the paragraph needs to flow. (These can be fragment sentences and can make the paper confusing when reading.)
·
Also stay away from many short paragraphs in the body of the paper, if organized well, then there will be medium length paragraphs.
·
Paper should be aligned to the left margin – not center or wide across.
-
Writing
·
This is a science research paper about a geology topic and must be in third person, therefore words such as we, me, I you, our, or us are not allowed to be used. Make sure these are not in your paper.
o
This also pertains to let’s. (Let’s short for let us.)
·
Make sure that all of your sentences are strong and independent.
·
Paper needs to be written using proper mechanics (clear, concise, complete sentences and paragraphs), proper spelling, grammar and punctuation.
·
Do not start your introduction or paper off with ‘This paper will look at…’ or ‘This paper will cover…’ Your thesis should not contain these words and should be a stand alone sentence with a passive lead in.
·
Spell Check Spell Check Spell Check.
·
Any introduction of a new word or scientific word that your reader may not know the definition of, be sure to include the definition for better understanding.
·
Acronyms. The first time an acronym is used, be sure to define what it stands for – such as USGS (United States Geological Survey). Then each subsequent time this acronym is used in the paper, you can just write USGS since it has already been defined to the reader.
·
Make sure to capitalize proper nouns such as Earth.
·
Make sure paragraphs transition and flow well between each other. Read the paper out loud to yourself before final submission to make sure these transitions are in place.
·
Please do not be a casual writer in this paper. What I mean by that is do not write how you would talk in a casual conversation, text on your phone or email a friend. This is a research paper.
Submit the Background Information portion of the final project, desc.docxrafbolet0
Submit the Background Information portion of the final project, describing the company and business product, service, or other idea from the business pla. In the description, make sure that you include the target stakeholders and their relationship to the mission, vision, and values of the company. Concisely describe the company and business product or service. Be sure to include the company’s publicly traded name and stock symbol if these exist.
2-3 pages. APA
.
Submit Files - Assignment 1 Role of Manager and Impact of Organizati.docxrafbolet0
Submit Files - Assignment 1 Role of Manager and Impact of Organizational Theories on Managers
Assignment 1 Role of Manager and Impact of Organizational Theories on Managers (Week 3)
Purpose:
In the first assignment, students are given a scenario in which the shipping manager who has worked for Galaxy Toys, Inc. since 1969. The scenario serves to set the stage for students to demonstrate how management theories have changed over time. For example, managing 30 years ago is different than managing in the 21
st
century.
Outcome Met by Completing This Assignment:
integrate management theories and principles into management practices
Instructions:
In Part One of this case study analysis, students are to use the facts from the case study to determine two different organization theories that are demonstrated. For Part Two, students will compare the 21
st
century manager to that of the main character in the case study and the implications of change in being a 21
st
century manager.
In selecting a school of thought and an organizational theory that best describes the current shipping manager, students will use the timeline to select a school of thought and a theory or theories of that time frame. Students will to use the course material to respond to most of the assignment requirements but will also need to research the theorist(s) and theories to complete the assignment. Students are expected to be thorough in responding.
In Part Two, students are going to take what they have learned and compare the management skills of the 21st century shipping manager to the skills of the current shipping manager.
Step 1:
Review “How to Analyze a Case Study” under Week 3 Content.
Step 2:
Create a Word or Rich Text Format (RTF) document that is double-spaced, 12-point font. The final product will be between 4-6 pages in length excluding the title page and reference page.
Step 3:
Review the grading rubric for the assignment.
Step 4:
In addition to providing an introduction, students will use headings following this format:
Title page with title, your name, the course, the instructor’s name;
Background;
Part One;
Part Two.
Step 5
: In writing a case study, the writing is in the third person. What this means is that there are no words such as “I, me, my, we, or us” (first person writing), nor is there use of “you or your” (second person writing). If uncertain how to write in the third person, view this link:
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/first-second-and-third-person
. Also note that students are not to provide personal commentary.
Step 6:
In writing this assignment, students are expected to support the reasoning using in-text citations and a reference list. If any material is used from a source document, it must be cited and referenced. A reference within a reference list cannot exist without an associated in-text citation and vice versa. View the sample APA paper under Week 1 content.
Step 7:
In writing thi.
SS
C
ha
Simple RegressionSimple Regression
pter
Chapter ContentsChapter Contents
12
12.1 Visual Displays and Correlation Analysis12.1 Visual Displays and Correlation Analysisp y yp y y
12.2 Simple Regression12.2 Simple Regression
12 3 Regression Terminology12 3 Regression Terminology12.3 Regression Terminology12.3 Regression Terminology
12.4 Ordinary Least Squares Formulas12.4 Ordinary Least Squares Formulas
12 T f Si ifi12 T f Si ifi12.5 Tests for Significance12.5 Tests for Significance
12.6 Analysis of Variance: Overall Fit12.6 Analysis of Variance: Overall Fit
12.7 Confidence and Prediction Intervals for 12.7 Confidence and Prediction Intervals for YY
12-1
SS
C
ha
Simple RegressionSimple Regression
pter
Chapter ContentsChapter Contents
12
12 8 Residual Tests12 8 Residual Tests12.8 Residual Tests12.8 Residual Tests
12.9 Unusual Observations12.9 Unusual Observations
12 10 Oth R i P bl12 10 Oth R i P bl12.10 Other Regression Problems12.10 Other Regression Problems
12-2
C
ha
SS
pter 1
Simple RegressionSimple Regression
Chapter Learning Objectives (LO’s)Chapter Learning Objectives (LO’s)
12
Chapter Learning Objectives (LO s)Chapter Learning Objectives (LO s)
LO12LO12--1: 1: Calculate and test a correlation Calculate and test a correlation coefficient coefficient for for significancesignificance..
LO12LO12--2: 2: Interpret Interpret the slope and intercept of a regression equation.the slope and intercept of a regression equation.
LO12LO12--3: 3: Make Make a prediction for a given a prediction for a given x value using a x value using a regressionregression
equationequation..qq
LO12LO12--4: 4: Fit a simple regression on an Excel scatter plot.Fit a simple regression on an Excel scatter plot.
LO12LO12--5:5: Calculate and interpretCalculate and interpret confidenceconfidence intervals forintervals for regressionregressionLO12LO12 5: 5: Calculate and interpret Calculate and interpret confidence confidence intervals for intervals for regressionregression
coefficientscoefficients..
LO12LO12 6:6: Test hypotheses about the slope and intercept by usingTest hypotheses about the slope and intercept by using t testst tests
12-3
LO12LO12--6: 6: Test hypotheses about the slope and intercept by using Test hypotheses about the slope and intercept by using t tests.t tests.
C
ha
ff
pter
Analysis of VarianceAnalysis of Variance
Ch t L i Obj ti (LO’ )Ch t L i Obj ti (LO’ )
12
Chapter Learning Objectives (LO’s)Chapter Learning Objectives (LO’s)
LO12LO12--7:7: Perform regression with Excel or other software.Perform regression with Excel or other software.
LO12LO12--8:8: Interpret the standard errorInterpret the standard error RR22 ANOVA table and F testANOVA table and F testLO12LO12 8: 8: Interpret the standard error, Interpret the standard error, RR , ANOVA table, and F test., ANOVA table, and F test.
LO12LO12--9:9: Distinguish between confidence and prediction intervals.Distinguish between conf.
SRF Journal EntriesreferenceAccount TitlesDebitsCredits3-CType journal entries in the space provided. Link these to the T-accounts and link the T-account balancesto the financial statements provided on the tabs at the bottom of the page.4-C
&L&"Arial,Bold"&14City of Monroe- Street and Highway Fund Journal Entries
SRF T-accountsDUE FROMCASHINVESTMENTSSTATE GOV'Tbb6,500bb55,000bb200,0006,50055,000200,000BUDGETARY FUND BALANCEFUND BALANCEACCOUNTS PAYABLERESERVE FOR ENCUMBRANCESRESERVE FOR ENCUMBRANCES(beginning of year)6,300bb-bb255,200bb6,300-255,200REVENUESREVENUESEXPENDITURES - STREETINTERGOVERNMENTALINVESTMENT INTEREST& HIGHWAY MAINTENANCEENCUMBRANCES----BUDGETARY ACCOUNTSBUDGETARYESTIMATED REVENUESAPPROPRIATIONSFUND BALANCE---
&L&16City of Monroe&C&16
Street and Highway Fund - General Ledger
Closing EntriesBUDGETARYAccount TitleDebitsCreditsFUND BALANCE-Preclosingclosing entry-FUND BALANCE255,200Preclosingclosing entry255,200ending balanceComplete the following tableNon-spendableRestrictedCommittedAssignedUnassignedTotalFund Balance-Budgetary Fund Balance - Reserve for Encumbrances-Totals------
&L&14City of Monroe&C&14
STREET & HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE FUND - Closing Entries
Stmt of revenues & expendituresRevenuesIntergovernmental RevenuesInterest on InvestmentsTotal Revenues$ -ExpendituresCurrent:Street & Highway MaintenanceTotal Expenditures-Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues Over Expenditures-Fund Balance, January 1Fund Balance, December 31$ -
&L&"Times New Roman,Regular"&14City of Monroe
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance
Street and Highway Maintenance Fund
For the year ended December 31, 2014
Balance SheetAssetsCashInvestmentsDue from State GovernmentTotal Assets$ -Liabilities and Fund EquityLiabilitiesAccounts PayableFund EquityFund Balance - Restricted forStreet and Highway MaintenanceTotal Liabilities and Fund Equity$ -
&L&"Times New Roman,Regular"&14City of Monroe
Street & Highway Maintenance Fund
Balance Sheet
As of December 31, 2014
Problem 1Problem 1Required: Identify the financial statement on which each of the following items appears by making an X in the appropriate column. The first one is done for you!(15 points total, 1 point each)IncomeBalanceStatement ofItemStatementSheetCash FlowsAccounts PayableXAccounts ReceivableAdvertising ExpenseCommon StockDividendsEquipmentFinancing ActivitiesInvesting ActivitiesLandOperating ActivitiesRent ExpenseRetained EarningsRevenueSalaries PayableUtility Expense
Problem 2Problem 2Required: Show the effects on the financial statements using a horizontal statement model as outlined below. The first one is done for you!(35 points total, 5 points each)1Sold $30,000 in merchandise for cash2Paid $5,000 for rent with cash3Paid $10,000 in salaries to employees with cash4Sold $25,000 in merchandise and customer paid on credit5Collected $10,000 cash for transaction #46Purchased a building for $100,000 and took out a loan for the money7Paid $1,200 for insuranceBala.
src/CommissionCalculation.javasrc/CommissionCalculation.javaimport java.util.Scanner;
import java.text.NumberFormat;
publicclassCommissionCalculation
{
publicstaticvoid main(String args[])
{
finaldouble salesTarget=600000;
//create an object of Scanner class to get the keyboard input
Scanner keyInput =newScanner(System.in);
//for currency format
NumberFormat numberFormat =NumberFormat.getCurrencyInstance();
//creating an object of SalesPerson class
SalesPerson salesPerson =newSalesPerson();
//prompt the user to enter the annual sales
System.out.print("Enter the annual sales : ");
double sale = keyInput.nextDouble();
//Calculate normal commission until sales target is reached
if(sale<=salesTarget)
{
//set the value of annual sale of sales person object
salesPerson.setAnnualSales(sale);
//displaying the report
System.out.println("The total annual compensation : "+numberFormat.format(salesPerson.getAnnualCompensation()));
}
//show compensation table with Accelerated factor when sales target exceeds
else
{
//method to show a compensation table if sales exceed 600000
salesPerson.getCompensationTable(sale);
}
}
}
src/SalesPerson.javasrc/SalesPerson.java
publicclassSalesPerson{
privatefinaldouble fixedSalary =120000.00;
privatefinaldouble commissionRate =1.2;
privatefinaldouble salesTarget=600000;
privatefinaldouble accelerationfactor=1.20;
privatedouble annualSales;
//default constructor
publicSalesPerson(){
annualSales =0.0;
}
//parameterized constructor
publicSalesPerson(double aSale){
annualSales = aSale;
}
//getter method for the annual sales
publicdouble getAnnualSales(){
return annualSales;
}
//method to set the value of annual sale
publicvoid setAnnualSales(double aSale){
annualSales = aSale;
}
//method to calculate and get commission
publicdouble getCommission()
{
if(annualSales<(0.80*salesTarget))
{
return0;
}
else
{
return annualSales *(commissionRate/100.0);
}
}
//method to calculate and calculate Compensation with Accelerated commission and display table
void getCompensationTable(double annualSales)
{
int count=0;
System.out.println("Annual Sales\t Total Compensation");
for(annualSales=salesTarget;annualSales<=((salesTarget)+(0.5*salesTarget));annualSales+=5000)
{
count=count+1;
double comm= annualSales *(commissionRate*Math.pow(1.2,count)/100.0);
System.out.println(annualSales+"\t"+(fixedSalary+comm));
}
}
//method to calculate and get annual compensation
publicdouble getAnnualCompensation(){
return fixedSalary + getCommission();
}
}
The development of any marketing mix depends on positioning, a process that influences potential customers' overall perception of a brand, product line, or organization in general. Position is the place a product, brand, or group of products occupies in consumers' minds relative to competing offering. Review positioning in your text. There are many examples to illustrate this concept. Then:
1. Describe the position .
SQLServerFiles/Cars.mdf
__MACOSX/SQLServerFiles/._Cars.mdf
SQLServerFiles/Contacts.mdf
__MACOSX/SQLServerFiles/._Contacts.mdf
SQLServerFiles/Cottages.mdf
__MACOSX/SQLServerFiles/._Cottages.mdf
SQLServerFiles/KataliClub.mdf
__MACOSX/SQLServerFiles/._KataliClub.mdf
SQLServerFiles/Northwind.mdf
__MACOSX/SQLServerFiles/._Northwind.mdf
SQLServerFiles/Northwind.sdf
__MACOSX/SQLServerFiles/._Northwind.sdf
SQLServerFiles/Pubs.mdf
__MACOSX/SQLServerFiles/._Pubs.mdf
SQLServerFiles/ReadMe.doc
SQL Server Files
Make sure to copy the SQL Server files to a read/write medium before attempting to use them in a program. The act of selecting a file for a connection creates an .ldf file, which fails on a read-only CD.
__MACOSX/SQLServerFiles/._ReadMe.doc
SQLServerFiles/RnrBooks.mdf
__MACOSX/SQLServerFiles/._RnrBooks.mdf
__MACOSX/._SQLServerFiles
“Subsea pipelines connectors”
Subsea pipeline are very popular around the world. Almost every water body has a pipeline, whether it is to transport distilled or spring water, or for gas, or for crude oil. Pipeline with great lengths are broken into segments, and has a connector between each segment; such a methodology are used to control damage and makes it easier for manufacturing and maintenance. However, theses devices are not perfect, and have different aspects that need to be considered when choosing one. Aspects are such as: pressure drop, installment, repair, and material used.
Different types of subsea pipeline connectors are being developed and used everyday in different parts of the world. Manufacturers are racing to be ahead of the technological advancement and rule the market. Starting with a fundamental article about the advancement and the market availability of subsea pipeline connectors back in 1976 to the current technology, this paper will review the literature materials of the present solutions of subsea pipeline connectors. Connectors technology in 1976
This fundamental article written by H. Mohr discusses the available subsea pipe connectors back in 1976[1]. The article offers solution that is applicable for a specific period of time, but when the technology of its time period is expired and new solutions are offered the article would hardly be discussed anymore, which actually made it impossible to find online or in nearby library. However, in general, the solutions offered and the way there were discussed are actually very relatable to this paper.
The paper lays on the three major methods of connections, then goes on to examine the current commercial product at that time. Three methods mentioned are the basic welding, elastomeric connectors, and advanced engineered horizontal systems. H. Mohr then moves to the market demand of the three methods, and two methods only were discussed, welding and mechanical connectors.
“Much emphasis had been placed on welded subsea connections in recent years, but properly designed and installed mechanical connections will always have an ap.
Square, Inc. is a financial services, merchant services aggregat.docxrafbolet0
Square, Inc. is a financial services, merchant services aggregator and mobile payment company based in San Francisco, California. The company markets several software and hardware payments products, including Square Register and Square Reader, and has expanded into small business services such as Square Capital, a financing program, and Square Payroll. The company was founded in 2009 by Jack Dorsey and Jim McKelvey and launched its first app and service in 2010.
• Square Register allows individuals and merchants in the United States, Canada, and Japan to accept offline debit and credit cards on their iOS or Android smartphone or tablet computer. The application software("app") supports manually entering the card details or swiping the card through the Square Reader, a small plastic device that plugs into the audio jack of a supported smartphone or tablet and reads the magnetic stripe. On the iPad version of the Square Register app, the interface resembles a traditional cash register.
Download and read the documents in Edgar.
– http://www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml
– And find the all files that are filed (especially S1)
• Find the information relevant to future sales.
• Construct the Pro‐forma income statement.
• Estimate future free cash flows for the next five years (account for investments, change in working capital, depreciation and taxes)
• Make a reasonable assumption about the growth rate of cash flows until infinity.
2013-10-22 22.19.51.jpg
2013-10-22 22.20.19.jpg
2013-10-22 22.21.54.jpg
Information and society
Since the advent of easy access to the internet and the World Wide Web, society has a different attitude towards information and access to information. The technology changes – from slow desk-tops with dial-up access to smartphones – have also changed our interaction with information.
This is also an area in which generational differences show up. Those of us born before the mid1980s or 1990s have followed all of these changes and have had to adapt to it. For those born in the 1990s (the millennials or digital natives), these methods of getting information have always existed. The millenials have seen some of the technology changes but don’t remember the “old” way. Keep this in mind as you read these notes.
An information society
At the beginning of the semester we talked about the many different ways we get information and the definitions of information. Now we’re going to look more at how information and information technologies have changed society.
Lester and Koehler talk about defining an information society in economic sense. While this is important, I don’t think we need to look at the percentage of our GNP to see that we do live in an information society. Think of all the companies that are based on information – computer technologies, web based businesses, cell phone and technologies, GPS, etc. There are also jobs that rely on information – customer service, stock markets, etc.
Our relationship with information .
SQL SQL 2) Add 25 CUSTOMERSs so that you now have 50 total..docxrafbolet0
The document contains SQL code that inserts 25 new customers and 25 new vehicles into database tables to increase the total numbers of customers and vehicles to 50 each. The code provides details of the customer and vehicle records being inserted such as names, addresses, vehicle details.
SPSS Input
Stephanie Crookston, Dominique Garrett-Smith, Latesha Simpson, Jannie Tollvier,
PSYCH/625
November 25, 2013
Mary Farmer
SPSS Input
After looking at the data and putting it through the ANOVA test; the conclusions are as follows:
There is a huge difference between the groups regarding degrees of freedom. And the use of ANOVA is essential because it is samples taken at different points and times of the same people. Probability is at zero percent because that means its directly at the mean and the f score is used to see if the null hypothesis can be rejected or fail to be rejected of its less than the critical value.
ANOVA
Score
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
Between Groups
609265.938
1
609265.938
2495.987
.000
Within Groups
53213.402
218
244.098
Total
662479.340
219
In a 1000-1250 word essay, explain the meaning of one visual symbol in American Beauty and the relation of that symbol to the message of the film as a whole. Since context forms meaning, you should analyze several instances in which the symbol appears in the film, explaining the meaning of the symbol in each appearance and showing how each instance contributes to the meaning of the symbol in the film as a whole. Since film is a visual medium, I have intentionally asked you to analyze a visual element for this assignment. Therefore, while you certainly should utilize dialogue or other elements of the film’s narrative, please do not neglect to interpret the specifically filmic aspects of this text, such as (but not limited to) camera work (framing, shot length, etc.), editing (“cutting” or “splicing”), sound effects, wardrobe, and lighting.
Here are some visual symbols from which you may choose, but please don’t feel limited to these:
· Plastic bags
· Roses
· Cameras
· Windows or Mirrors
· Guns
· Extreme darkness or bright light
· Specific colors or color combinations
Please note that the task here is twofold: you should present an interpretation of the particular symbol you choose and show how that symbol helps construct the overall message of the film as you see it. A successful thesis statement will present a clear articulation of the meaning of your chosen symbol, a succinct statement as to the overall message of the film, and an explanation of the relationship between these two. As with the other essays for this class, please avoid rendering value judgments. You should not present an evaluation of whether or not you like the film (or whether it’s “good” or “bad”).
Since a successful analysis will require more viewing of the film than what we have time for in class, you may find it advantageous to rent/purchase/download a copy for yourself. For those who would rather not attain their own copy, I have also put a copy of the film on reserve in the library.
Due Dates:
Four copies of your rough draft due: Tuesday 3 December
Workshop: Thursday 5 December
Final draft due: Thursday 12/12 (the day of th.
Spring
2015
–
MAT
137
–Luedeker
Name:
________________________________
Quiz
#1
–
Introduction
to
Sigma
Notation
Directions:
Please
print
out
this
assignment
or
rewrite
the
problems
on
another
sheet
of
paper.
Write
the
final
answer
as
an
integer
or
an
improper
fraction.
You
must
show
all
work
to
receive
credit.
This
assignment
is
due
Wednesday
January
14
at
the
start
of
class.
The
notation
𝑓(𝑛)
!
!!!
is
called
Sigma
Notation.
The
symbol
Σ
means
sum
a
sequence
of
numbers.
The
first
number
in
the
sequence
is
𝑓 𝑎 ,
the
second
number
in
the
sequence
is
𝑓 𝑎 + 1 ,
the
third
number
in
the
sequence
is 𝑓 𝑎 + 2
etc.
,
and
the
last
number
in
the
sequence
is
𝑓(𝑚).
Here
are
two
examples:
𝑛 = 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 = 27
!
!!!
𝑛! + 1 =
!
!!!
3! + 1 + 4! + 1 + 5! + 1 + 6! + 1 = 10 + 17 + 26 + 37 = 90
Problems:
Simplify.
Write
your
answer
as
an
integer
or
improper
fraction.
Show
all
work.
1. 𝑛
!"
!!!
2.
1
2!
!
!!!
3.
1
𝑛
!
!!!
4. (−1)!
!
!!!
1
𝑛
5.
1
𝑛!
!
!!!
Spring
2015
–
MAT
137
–Luedeker
Name:
________________________________
Quiz
#2
–
Numerical
Integration
Directions:
Please
print
out
this
assignment
or
rewrite
the
problems
on
another
sheet
of
paper.
Write
the
final
answer
as
a
decimal
rounded
to
three
decimal
places.
You
must
show
all
work
to
receive
credit.
This
assignment
is
due
Friday
January
16
at
the
start
of
class.
Consider
the
definite
integral
𝑒!
!
𝑑𝑥!! .
Use
n
=
4
and
the
following
methods
to
estimate
the
value
of
the
definite
integral.
1. Left
Rule
2. Right
Rule
3. Midpoint
Rule
4. Trapezoid
Rule
5. Simpson’s
Rule
Spring
2015
–
MAT
137
–Luedeker
Name:
________________________________
Quiz
#3
Directions:
Please
print
out
this
assignment
or
rewrite
the
problems
on
another
sheet
of
paper.
You
must
show
all
work
to
receive
credit.
This
assignment
Springdale Shopping SurveyThe major shopping areas in the com.docxrafbolet0
Springdale Shopping Survey*
The major shopping areas in the community of Springdale include Springdale Mall, West Mall, and the downtown area on Main Street. A telephone survey has been conducted to identify strengths and weaknesses of these areas and to find out how they fit into the shopping activities of local residents. The 150 respondents were also asked to provide information about themselves and their shopping habits. The data are provided in the file SHOPPING. The variables in the survey were as follows:
A. How Often Respondent Shops at Each Area (Variables 1–3)
1. Springdale Mall
2. Downtown
3. West Mall
6 or more times/wk.
(1)
(1)
(1)
4–5 times/wk.
(2)
(2)
(2)
2–3 times/wk.
(3)
(3)
(3)
1 time/wk.
(4)
(4)
(4)
2–4 times/mo.
(5)
(5)
(5)
0–1 times/mo.
(6)
(6)
(6)
B. How Much the Respondent Spends during a Trip to Each Area (Variables 4–6)
4. Springdale Mall
5. Downtown
6. West Mall
$200 or more
(1)
(1)
(1)
$150–under $200
(2)
(2)
(2)
$100–under $150
(3)
(3)
(3)
$ 50–under $100
(4)
(4)
(4)
$ 25–under $50
(5)
(5)
(5)
$ 15–under $25
(6)
(6)
(6)
less than $15
(7)
(7)
(7)
C. General Attitude toward Each Shopping Area (Variables 7–9)
7. Springdale Mall
8. Downtown
9. West Mall
Like very much
(5)
(5)
(5)
Like
(4)
(4)
(4)
Neutral
(3)
(3)
(3)
Dislike
(2)
(2)
(2)
Dislike very much
(1)
(1)
(1)
D. Which Shopping Area Best Fits Each Description (Variables 10–17)
Springdale
Mall
Downtown
West
Mall
No
Opinion
10. Easy to return/exchange goods
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
11. High quality of goods
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
12. Low prices
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
13. Good variety of sizes/styles
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
14. Sales staff helpful/friendly
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
15. Convenient shopping hours
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
16. Clean stores and surroundings
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
17. A lot of bargain sales
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
E. Importance of Each Item in Respondent’s Choice of a Shopping Area (Variables 18–25)
Not Very
Important Important
F. Information about the Respondent (Variables 26–30)
(
18.
Easy
to
return/exchange
goods
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
19.
High
quality
of
goods
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
20.
Low
prices
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
21.
Good
variety
of
sizes/styles
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
22.
Sales
staff
helpful/friendly
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
23.
Convenient
shopping
hours
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
24.
Clean
stores
and
surroundings
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
25.
A
lot
of
bargain
sales
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
t
)26. Gender: (1) = Male (2) = Female
27. Number of years of school completed:
(1) = less than 8 years (3) = 12–under 16 years
(2) = 8–under 12 years (4) = 16 years or more
28. Marital status: (1) = Married (2) = Single or other
29. Number of people in household: pe.
Springfield assignment InstructionFrom the given information, yo.docxrafbolet0
Springfield assignment Instruction
From the given information, you are required to make a functional network. In Springfield we have a router and four switches connected as daisy chain topology. Then we have output of show commands. It is obvious that it is a non-functional network and you have to implement a solution to make functional.
Task in Springfield assignment
· From the show output commands, you can identify the problems and then provide solution.
· Configure all the tasks as in Springfield assignment as per instructions
· Create Server VLAN, Instructional VLAN, and Administrative VLAN
· Configure Access method of VLANs
· Configure Switch 1 as root bridge
· Configure trunking on all switches
· Configure default gateway
· Create and configure interface VLAN1
First of all, allow me to thank you for your email of offer dated September 2, 2015. I am writing to inform you of my acceptance to your kind offer and in my class CMIT 350/6380. This class has one technical writing assignment broken into three parts: Draft1, Draft2, and Draft3. I do not have any sample assignment, however I am reviewing student’s draft version and providing feedback. To help you in this regard I am submitting you below outline pf paper.
In the beginning please give brief descriptions of the project, such as why are you doing, what are the problems, and possible solutions.
Background information:
Springfield site network is assigned to me to investigate the problems and find the solutions to fix the problem. From the site topology and sh output commands I determined that spanning-tree protocol is misconfigured and it is blocking few ports. And these are the reasons that network is a non-functional.
Implementing
Solution
:
The following are required information for configuring the network
IP address range 10.30.x.x/16
Device to be configured
Configuring commands
Device Names
Configuration Required
Configuring command
Switch#1
All devices
Host name
Hostname Switch_Springfield1
Switch#2
Host name
Hostname Switch_Springfield2
Switch1
All devices
Create console password
Create vty password
Only on Switch1
Create VLANs
Access vlan
Interface fa0/0
Switchport mode adccess
Switchport access vlan 11
Switch1
All Switches
Create trunk connections between switches
Int gi0/0
Switchport mode trunk
Switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
Switchport trunk allowed native vlan 1
Router
Configure ip address
Int fa0/0
Ip address 10.30.1.1 255.255.255.0
Switch1
Configure default gateway
Ip default-gateway 10.30.1.1 255.255.255.0
Switches
Configure spanning-tree protocol
Spanning-tree RPVST
Switch1
Make Swich 1 as root bridge of network
Configurations
Rough Draft
This paper will focus on the four main theoretical perspectives within sociology which include conflict, functionalism, utilitarianism and symbolic interactionism with the attempt to explain why groups of people choose to perform certain actions and how societies function or change in a certain way.
Socio.
Temple of Asclepius in Thrace. Excavation resultsKrassimira Luka
The temple and the sanctuary around were dedicated to Asklepios Zmidrenus. This name has been known since 1875 when an inscription dedicated to him was discovered in Rome. The inscription is dated in 227 AD and was left by soldiers originating from the city of Philippopolis (modern Plovdiv).
How to Download & Install Module From the Odoo App Store in Odoo 17Celine George
Custom modules offer the flexibility to extend Odoo's capabilities, address unique requirements, and optimize workflows to align seamlessly with your organization's processes. By leveraging custom modules, businesses can unlock greater efficiency, productivity, and innovation, empowering them to stay competitive in today's dynamic market landscape. In this tutorial, we'll guide you step by step on how to easily download and install modules from the Odoo App Store.
THE SACRIFICE HOW PRO-PALESTINE PROTESTS STUDENTS ARE SACRIFICING TO CHANGE T...indexPub
The recent surge in pro-Palestine student activism has prompted significant responses from universities, ranging from negotiations and divestment commitments to increased transparency about investments in companies supporting the war on Gaza. This activism has led to the cessation of student encampments but also highlighted the substantial sacrifices made by students, including academic disruptions and personal risks. The primary drivers of these protests are poor university administration, lack of transparency, and inadequate communication between officials and students. This study examines the profound emotional, psychological, and professional impacts on students engaged in pro-Palestine protests, focusing on Generation Z's (Gen-Z) activism dynamics. This paper explores the significant sacrifices made by these students and even the professors supporting the pro-Palestine movement, with a focus on recent global movements. Through an in-depth analysis of printed and electronic media, the study examines the impacts of these sacrifices on the academic and personal lives of those involved. The paper highlights examples from various universities, demonstrating student activism's long-term and short-term effects, including disciplinary actions, social backlash, and career implications. The researchers also explore the broader implications of student sacrifices. The findings reveal that these sacrifices are driven by a profound commitment to justice and human rights, and are influenced by the increasing availability of information, peer interactions, and personal convictions. The study also discusses the broader implications of this activism, comparing it to historical precedents and assessing its potential to influence policy and public opinion. The emotional and psychological toll on student activists is significant, but their sense of purpose and community support mitigates some of these challenges. However, the researchers call for acknowledging the broader Impact of these sacrifices on the future global movement of FreePalestine.
Level 3 NCEA - NZ: A Nation In the Making 1872 - 1900 SML.pptHenry Hollis
The History of NZ 1870-1900.
Making of a Nation.
From the NZ Wars to Liberals,
Richard Seddon, George Grey,
Social Laboratory, New Zealand,
Confiscations, Kotahitanga, Kingitanga, Parliament, Suffrage, Repudiation, Economic Change, Agriculture, Gold Mining, Timber, Flax, Sheep, Dairying,
Andreas Schleicher presents PISA 2022 Volume III - Creative Thinking - 18 Jun...EduSkills OECD
Andreas Schleicher, Director of Education and Skills at the OECD presents at the launch of PISA 2022 Volume III - Creative Minds, Creative Schools on 18 June 2024.
A Visual Guide to 1 Samuel | A Tale of Two HeartsSteve Thomason
These slides walk through the story of 1 Samuel. Samuel is the last judge of Israel. The people reject God and want a king. Saul is anointed as the first king, but he is not a good king. David, the shepherd boy is anointed and Saul is envious of him. David shows honor while Saul continues to self destruct.
This document provides an overview of wound healing, its functions, stages, mechanisms, factors affecting it, and complications.
A wound is a break in the integrity of the skin or tissues, which may be associated with disruption of the structure and function.
Healing is the body’s response to injury in an attempt to restore normal structure and functions.
Healing can occur in two ways: Regeneration and Repair
There are 4 phases of wound healing: hemostasis, inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling. This document also describes the mechanism of wound healing. Factors that affect healing include infection, uncontrolled diabetes, poor nutrition, age, anemia, the presence of foreign bodies, etc.
Complications of wound healing like infection, hyperpigmentation of scar, contractures, and keloid formation.
NIPER 2024 MEMORY BASED QUESTIONS.ANSWERS TO NIPER 2024 QUESTIONS.NIPER JEE 2...
Source Code, Object Code, and The Da Vinci Code The Debate on Int.docx
1. Source Code, Object Code, and The Da Vinci Code: The Debate
on Intellectual Property Protection for Software Programs
Neelakantan, Murali; Armstrong, Alex
Computer and Internet Lawyer
10-01-2006
Jump to best part of documentYour Summary Note
For many years, the courts in England and the United States
have tried to balance the protection of an author's skill and
labor with the competing notion of a free market in which ideas
are adapted in the search for newer and better products. It is
sometimes argued that "what is worth copying is worth
protecting." This statement is only a crude approximation of the
central theme in a debate that remains as controversial now as it
was 25 years ago-the suitability of a copyright or a patent-based
regime for software programs.
For purposes of this article, we have restricted our analysis to
the two markets that are likely to be of most interest to the
reader-the United States and the United Kingdom. The debate
has, however, taken on truly global proportions, with new and
exciting markets (and competitive pressures) emanating from
the Far East, India, and China most notably. The questions
asked in this article are designed therefore to apply globally.
Copyright in Software Programs
The ease with which copyright is granted sometimes betrays its
limitations. Is copyright still "fit for purpose" as the global
market for software continues its inexorable expansion?
In order to answer this question, this section will seek to:
* Examine the existing state of copyright law as it applies to
2. software programs; and
* Determine whether current copyright law remains flexible
enough to capture the dramatic changes to the methods used by
developers to create software programs.
The English Law of Copyright
The English law of copyright is often described as drawing
clear dividing lines between the idea (which is not protectable
per se) and the expression of an idea (which would be). This is
a misleading simplification of the relevant provision of the
Copyright, Designs and Patent Act 1988,1 which requires that a
work be recorded "in writing or otherwise"2 before it can be
afforded the protection of copyright. The law says that
copyright is infringed if (a) there has been actual copying, and
(b) a "substantial part" of the work has been taken. What
amounts to a "substantial part" is a question of fact and degree
and is the question that has exercised the courts most in the
field of computer software.
In Cantor Fitzgerald v. Tradition (UK),3 the court considered
whether the developers of a rival bond-broking application had
infringed the copyright in the claimant's program. The
defendants were ex-employees of the claimant and had used an
earlier version of the claimant's program as a reference for their
own application. The court also found that the defendants had
copied a small portion (3.3 percent) of the claimant's code into
the defendants' own program. The judge held on the facts that
there had been specific instances of copying by the defendants
and that the copying had, in these instances, amounted to a
substantial part of each module concerned.
The case seeks to shed some light on how the law of copyright
can be applied to software programs. The judge in Cantor
Fitzgerald made some important points:
3. * It was possible for the defendants to infringe the claimant's
copyright at the "architecture" level, that is, its overall structure
and how the program allocated certain functions to the various
component modules.
* The definition of what constituted a "substantial part" of a
software program required the court to consider each work as a
whole, not the individual portions of code. He disagreed with
the High Court of Australia in Autodesk v. Dyason (1992),
which had found that any portion of code, no matter how small,
would form a "substantial part" of the work since in its absence
the application as a whole would fail to function correctly or at
all. The Australian court's approach was technologically correct
but legally inaccurate.
* In determining whether the infringing product copied a
substantial part of the claimant's product, the court would assess
the existence of copyright in the claimant's code as a function
of the amount of skill and effort that had gone into designing
and developing it.
The US Law of Copyright
In the United States, a work may be subject to copyright
protection if it is both: (1) original and (2) "fixed in any
tangible medium of expression."4 Copyright protection is not
available to any "idea, procedure, process, system, method of
operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the
form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or
embodied in [the] work."5
In Computer Associates v. Altai,6 Computer Associates alleged
that Altai's "Oscar" program contained elements of Computer
Associates' "Adapter" program. The court approached the
problem by undertaking a series of detailed analyses into the
4. claimant's program. It first analyzed the "level of abstraction,"
retracing the developer's steps back from the final object code
through to the program's conception. The court then proceeded
to "filter out" elements of the program that were (1) dictated by
efficiency; (2) dictated by external factors; and (3) taken from
the public domain.7
The court was able to group its findings into a "core of
protectable expression," an approximate equivalent to the
concept of "a substantial part" in English law. On the facts, the
court found that the defendants had not appropriated this core of
protectable expression.
It should be noted that the court considered the merger doctrine
as one of its central themes in determining the core of
protectable expression. The doctrine's underlying principle is
that "[w]hen there is essentially only one way to express an
idea, the idea and its expression are inseparable and copyright is
no bar to copying that expression."8 In Computer Associates,
the court felt that the merger doctrine was "an effective way to
eliminate non-protectable expression contained in computer
programs" because it allowed the court to disregard those
elements of a computer program that could only be expressed in
a certain way.
Comparisons Between the UK and US Regimes
The analysis of the judge in Cantor Fitzgerald is similar to the
abstraction exercise of the US Court of Appeals in Computer
Associates. Both regimes seek to go beyond the concept of pure
textual copying and arrive at a broadly similar result, although
the key difference remains the refusal by the English courts to
recognize the validity of the merger doctrine. English courts
will consider originality as a function of the skill and effort
used to create the work, even if in some cases there is no real
scope for alternative expression, and will refuse to determine
5. originality through subjective judgment of the ideas that
underpin the work. The genesis of this position lies in the
numerous compilation cases, most notably Ladbroke v. William
Hill (1964) and the position reflects a desire by the English
courts to remove subjectivity from the assessment of what is
and is not copyrightable and "compensate for a lack of a roving
concept of unfair competition."9
Can we therefore conclude that the English courts will value
hard work rather than protect an original and good idea?
The Da Vinci Code Decision: Placing a Value on Ideas?
Does the recent decision in Baigent and Leigh v. Random House
(2006) (Da Vinci Code) hint at a gradual shift towards the US
position?
As in the Cantor Fitzgerald case, the judge in the Da Vinci Code
case was looking for the expression of a combination of ideas,
structure, and content that, taken together, constituted a
substantial part of the earlier work. The judge referred to
another case of literary copying (Ravenscroft v. Herbert (1980))
in order to introduce the established rule that while facts,
themes, and ideas cannot be protected per se, the way in which
these facts, themes, and ideas are put together (the work's
"architecture") could be. The judge went on to say that the
claimants would need to "show that there is a putting together
of facts, themes and ideas by them as a result of their efforts"
and that Dan Brown had copied these. He then undertook a
painstaking analysis of The Holy Blood and Holy Grail in order
to draw a firm boundary between what was or was not protected.
The English law of copyright has long established that this form
of abstraction is a qualitative test rather than a quantitative
one.10 It is a test that is similar in many ways to that of the
court in Cantor Fitzgerald. The judge decided that, while Mr.
6. Brown had used facts and some of the "central themes" that
were contained in The Holy Blood and Holy Grail, facts were
not copyrightable per se and that the "central themes"
reproduced in The Da Vinci Code were too abstract to constitute
a "substantial part" of the earlier work. Coupled with the
finding that Mr. Brown and his wife had devoted significant
skill and effort to the research and development of the content
of The Da Vinci Code, it was no surprise that the judge found in
favor of the defendants. The result was that Mr. Brown was
entitled to express the themes he had picked from The Holy
Blood and Holy Grail in a way and using methods that were his
own.
The factual outcome of the case may have little or no relevance
to software developers. Indeed the courts in England have
always been uncomfortable about applying tests used to
determine substantiality in purely literary cases to those
involving software. It could be argued, however, that the
analysis undertaken by the judge as part of his assessment of
"substantiality" appeared to imply the need to consider the
originality of an idea, at least as part of the overall test.11
The Problem
As it currently stands, copyright law (as it applies to software
developers) can be summarized as follows:
* The developer's ideas cannot be protected to the extent they
cannot be expressed on a medium.
* Therefore, object code, source code, program structures and
program notes (taken together) constitute the expression of the
developer's idea.
* The expression of the developer's ideas cannot be protected to
the extent that the ideas can be expressed differently by
7. someone else without reference to the developer's object code,
source code, program structures, and program notes.
Does this emphasis on "perspiration" rather than "inspiration"
capture the ways in which software developers create their
products?
Software development has evolved significantly since the early
days of programming. Programs have become more complex and
the industry has grown in such a way that developers are
increasingly reliant on shorter development cycles in order to
preserve or enhance their competitive advantage. This has led
the industry to adopt a natural way of making itself more
efficient. Ever since the software industry evolved toward
modular or object-orientated class-based programming (modules
of code woven together to create a new piece of code), vast
libraries of pre-packaged code have become available to many
software developers who wish to use them under license in their
own works. Software is now a complex mixture of source code
(code created by the developer using a more human, high-level
language) and object code (generally low-level machine-specific
code, usually expressed as a collection of binary digits to call
specific functions of a computer system).
Source code is usually compiled (translated into object code)
and then linked to static and dynamically-linked object code
libraries (some of which are off-the-shelf, others licensed from
other developers), or increasingly linked to complex databases.
As a result of this push for standardization, it could be argued
that the problem that software developers now face as a result
of this shift in programming technique lies less in their ability
to protect their code, but more in their ability to protect the
algorithms (the ideas) that are expressed in their code.
Supporters of the merger doctrine in the US recognize this
issue,12 which is the essence of the copyright versus patent
8. debate as it applies to software programs.
The Expression of the Problem
The mam disadvantage of copyrights as a protection for
algorithms is that copyrights do not protect the functionality or
the technique of an algorithm. This disadvantage is insignificant
if the algorithm is not the essence of the computer program. For
instance, in video games, the meaningful part of the computer
program is the interaction with the user, not the method used for
solving a problem. However, when an algorithm is developed as
a new method for solving a problem, the general idea and
functionality of the algorithm-i.e., the inventive leaps-[are] not
protected.13
For the developer who seeks to protect a truly new algorithm,
this creates two classes of commercial problems, which can be
expressed as follows:
* Problem 1: Two or more developers discover the same
algorithm separately and then go on to express the same
algorithm using different program structures and different code.
The algorithm is new and original. They are each equally
deserving of the protection of copyright law, but in absolute
commercial terms, they will share the potential market for the
algorithm with the other.
* Problem 2: One developer discovers a new and original
algorithm and then expresses this algorithm using a unique
program structure and unique code. He has copyright protection
in respect of the idea as expressed in the code, but in absolute
commercial terms does not have sole control of the potential
market for the algorithm; another developer could express the
algorithm (the idea) differently using different code and market
a rival product accordingly.
9. These problems share a common feature: The developer is not in
absolute control of the market generated by his idea. If, in the
commercial sphere, the goal of investing time and effort in
creating new ideas and solutions is to achieve optimum
commercial gain, then should not the intellectual property grant
a monopoly right to the creator of these ideas or solutions?
Is Patent Protection the Answer!
In the United Kingdom, software is not patentable, but the
debate over -whether it should be is conjoined with the
continuing debate in the European Parliament over the ambit of
the proposed Directive on computer implemented inventions.
In the United States, software and business processes are
patentable, but whether this system has a positive impact on the
market is debatable.
Evolution
To obtain the benefit of patent protection, an invention must be
(1) patent-eligible subject matter; (2) useful; (3) novel; and (4)
nonobvious.14
The US courts have taken a gradual road toward granting
software products the benefit of patent protection. Unlike the
European Union, where the debate rages over the need to
implement a community-wide software patent Directive, the US
courts have adapted their position with regard to the
patentability of software and business processes. Since the 1981
case Diamond v. Diehr15 (in which the US Supreme Court
ordered the USPTO to grant a patent in relation to an invention
even though the substantial part of the invention consisted of a
computer program), the USPTO has gradually extended patent
protection to a -wide variety of computer-based software
products and business processes.
10. An algorithm (as applied to computer programs) can be thought
of as a machine-a computer that is hard-wired to perform the
algorithm. In State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature
Financial Group, Inc.,16 the Federal Circuit held that an
algorithm is capable of receiving patent protection if it is
useful, concrete, and produces a tangible result.
Having overcome the conceptual difficulty of accepting
algorithms as patentable per se, the courts brought further
refinements to the requirements of usefulness, novelty, and non-
obviousness. There is now a settled regime for the protection of
algorithms, the foundations of any computer software program.
The gradual introduction of this additional layer of protection
for algorithms, however, while welcomed by some, has had
unusual side effects on the US software industry.
Distortion?
Since the gradual extension of patent protection to software
programs, the software industry has witnessed a significant
growth in the number of patents being sought by large
organizations. As of December 2003, "software and Internet-
related patents accounted] for more than 15 percent of all
patents granted."17 Earge organizations are pursuing patents for
two primary purposes:
1. Revenue generation: monopolizing ideas with a view to
licensing them to developers who will transform or incorporate
them into tangible products; and
2. Deterrent value: warding off the holders of and applicants for
patents for similar ideas with the threat of protracted and
necessarily expensive litigation.
The clearest manifestation of these side effects occurred
11. recently in connection with the high-profile litigation between
Canada's Research in Motion Limited (the makers of the
Blackberry handheld device) and NTP Inc. (a US-based
company). NTP's sole purpose, it appears, is to acquire and
maintain a portfolio of patents with a view to bringing
infringement proceedings against any person or organization
that attempts to use any technology that is protected by those
patents (a so-called patent troll). NTP sued Research in Motion
alleging infringement of several of NTP's patents. The case
went through the litigation process and ultimately ended with
Research in Motion agreeing to pay the sum of US $613 million
to NTP in settlement of all claims. The case demonstrates a
fundamental feature of (or problem with) the modern US
intellectual property protection system.
Research in Motion had spent a lot of time, effort, and money
developing the system from which it has reaped stellar
commercial rewards. The US district court was concerned only
with the violation of the monopoly right granted in respect of
NTP's idea, however, not its expression as a tangible product.
The fact that NTP had tried (and failed) to market its invention
14 years prior was no bar to its preventing Research in Motion
from marketing its own products using NTP's idea
notwithstanding the value (both commercial and tangible) of the
Research in Motion product.
The case is significant because it polarizes the debate on the
suitability of patent protection for software programs. It gives
further ammunition to those who believe that ideas should be
prized above endeavor and commercial skill, and it reinforces
the argument from others that extending patent protection for
software programs creates unnatural distortions in a market that
has thrived against the backdrop of existing copyright laws.
Despite the obvious passions expressed by those on opposing
sides, it is possible to view the debate in pragmatic, commercial
12. terms.
The Market Forces Argument
The debate over the respective merits of copyright protection
and patent protection is driven by one central theme:
appropriate commercial rewards for the creators of innovative
software programs through control of the markets for which
their products were created.
A Commercial Question
The current differences in the regimes that exist in England and
in the United States show that developers are caught between
two conflicting pressures: (1) inadequate protection (the current
risk with existing English-style copyright-only regimes) and (2)
too much protection (the stifling of healthy competition and the
creation of unnatural distortions in the market, as seen in US-
style patent regimes).
Which regime is best suited to the developer who creates a
software product based on a new idea?
The Commercial Answer: Theory
The debate over the suitability of copyright or patent protection
as the most effective means of protecting a developer's research
and development often ignores one crucial point: The market
ultimately decides whether a product succeeds or fails. A
developer can make a commercial success out of a new idea if
he is able to follow three simple rules:
1. His idea is original and unique.
2. He can translate that idea into software ahead of the
competition.
13. 3. He can bring the resulting product to market efficiently ahead
of the competition.
These three rules work because the market recognizes the value
of marketing new and original ideas ahead of the competition. It
allows the developer to enjoy a de facto monopoly while the
others try to catch up.
The Commercial Answer: Applied
Even with the comparatively weaker protections offered by
copyright, we know that a rival cannot develop a competing
product quickly from scratch. He cannot avoid the time
penalties for which the market will penalize him by simply
reverse engineering a product and adapting only superficial
aspects of it to disguise the infringement. He would (1) fall foul
of the law and (2) would not fool the market. In addition, if one
released a product to the market (having kept the idea secret),
then regardless of how the law protects the idea, one can release
a newer and improved version of the end product by the time a
rival has caught up. In other words, an inventor can maintain a
competitive advantage for as long as he develops and improves
an idea.
As all developers know, turning a good idea into a successful
product is hard work. The idea is only the beginning. The Da
Vinci Code case confirms the view that the English courts will
consider (but ultimately subordinate) ideas and themes to the
skill and effort used to express them. Perhaps this is no
accident. Genius, after all, is 1 percent inspiration and 9 percent
perspiration.
FOOTNOTE
Notes
1. Sections 3(2), 178 (for definition of "writing").
14. 2. Id.
3. Cantor Fitzgerald v Tradition (UK), RPC 95 (2000).
4. 17 U.S.C. § 102(a).
5. Id. § 102(b).
6. Computer Associates v Altai, 982 F.2d 693 (1992), 23
U.S.P.Q. 2d 1241.
7. The court explained the general concept of the abstraction
process as follows: "In ascertaining substantial similarity under
this approach, a court would first break down the allegedly
infringed program into its constituent structural parts. Then, by
examining each of these parts for such things as incorporated
ideas, expression that is necessarily incidental to those ideas,
and elements that are taken from the public domain, a court
would then be able to sift out all non-protectable material."
8. Concrete Machinery Co. v. Classic Lawn Ornaments, Inc.,
843 F.2d 600, 606 (1st Cir. 1988).
9. Cornish & Llewelyn, Intellectual Property: Patents,
Copyright, Trade Marks and Allied Rights (5th ed.) at 391.
10. See Ladbroke v.William Hill, 1 W.L.R 273 (1964).
11. Baigent & Leight v. Random House, EWHC 719 (2006), ¶¶
268 and 270.
12. See Melville B. Nimmer & David Nimmer, Nimmer on
Copyright, § 13.01, at 13-65 and 13-66-71: "[I]n many instances
it is virtually impossible to write a program to perform
particular functions in a specific computing environment
15. without employing standard techniques. [. . .] This is a result of
the fact that a programmer's freedom of design choice is often
circumscribed by extrinsic considerations such as (1) the
mechanical specifications of the computer on which a particular
program is intended to run; (2) compatibility requirements of
other programs with which a program is designated to operate in
conjunction; (3) computer manufacturers' design standards; (4)
demands of the industry being serviced; and (5) widely accepted
programming practices within the computer industry."
13. Allen Clark Zoracki, "Comment: When Is An Algorithm
Invented? The Need For A New Paradigm For Evaluating An
Algorithm For Intellectual Property," 15 Alb. L.J. Sci. & Tech.
579 (2005).
14. 35 U.S.C. §§101-103.
15. Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175 (1981).
16. State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group,
Inc., 149 F.3d 1368, 1373 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
17. Jonathan Krim, "Patenting Air or Protecting Property?
Information Age Invents a New Problem," Wash. Post, Dec. 11,
2003.
AUTHOR_AFFILIATION
Murali Neelakantan is a dual qualified (Indian and English Law)
partner and Alex Armstrong is an associate at the London office
of Arnold & Porter LLP. Arnold & Porter acted for the
defendants in the Da Vinci Code case.
Source Code, Object Code, and The Da Vinci Code: The Debate
on Intellectual Property Protection for Software Programs
Byline: Neelakantan, Murali; Armstrong, Alex
Volume: 23
Number: 10
16. ISSN: 15314944
Publication Date: 10-01-2006
Page: 1
Section: Intellectual Property
Type: Periodical
Language: English
Copyright Aspen Publishers, Inc. Oct 2006
Back to top ^
Top of Form
Bottom of Form
Citation for your reference:
Ensure the accuracy and completeness of your bibliography by
reviewing this automatically generated citation information
against the guidelines provided by the standard reference works
published by the Modern Language Association (MLA) or the
American Psychological Association (APA).
Edit this citation
Neelakantan, Murali., Armstrong, Alex.. "Source Code, Object
Code, and The Da Vinci Code: The Debate on Intellectual
Property Protection for Software Programs." Computer and
Internet Lawyer. 01 Oct. 2006: 1. eLibrary. Web. 05 Aug. 2013.
Neelakantan, M., Armstrong, A. (2006, October 01). Source
Code, Object Code, and The Da Vinci Code: The Debate on
Intellectual Property Protection for Software Programs.
Computer and Internet Lawyer, (10), 1, Retrieved from
http://elibrary.bigchalk.com.libproxy.edmc.edu
Document info:
Hits:0
Date:10-01-2006
17. Size:24 Kb
Reading Level (generic)
Bigchalk's standard reading level is based on the Gunning Fogg
Fleisch-Kincaid index. This index provides a number on a scale
of 0-21 that reflects the number of syllables, words and
sentences in a document. Documents containing paragraphs with
longer words and sentences will score higher, resulting in a
higher reading level number.
For more information, visit our reading level help page.
Start page:1
Volume:23
ISSN:15314944
refdesk
on
reference
50
50
true