Home Syracuse University College of Law NYSTAR - New York State Foundation for Science, Technology & Innovation
Search
   Go
Newsletter Signup
Name:
Email:

Jessica Chesher

Managing Editor


Innovation eReview

October 2006 Edition


In This Issue:



Editor's Welcome


  Happy Halloween from all of us at the Innovation e-Review!! 


Since we are hedonists at heart and, err, elsewhere, the Halloween edition of the Innovation e-Review is all treats, all the time.  We think there is enough trickery in this world, and we don't need to add to the fray.  We have bad puns, jokes that may be half a bubble off, silly rewrites and popular cultur references galore, but no tricks.  We figure that life hands all of us enough tricks, certainly don't need any from us.  Frankly, we're pleased you've even gotten this far, and your reward is treats, nothing but treats, so enjoy.


Harvest time in the Northeast always evokes those time honored images of red, ripe apples, burnished orange pumpkins, corn stalks, bins of acorn squash and all that crisp country air.  Speaking personally though, this year it evokes images of tract hoes, concrete forms and money, lots and lots of money (relatively speaking, of course).  Yes, it’s true, after two years of living in a kind-of, sort-of insulated “camp” (Northern New York vernacular for a summer cottage), we’re building a house.  Now building a house is an interesting proposition, and I’m sure there are people who are able to do it without breaking a sweat, but, not unsurprisingly, I’m not one of them.  And this is not just any home, nope, it’s, in the language of the Internet home building forums (our second home, if you will), our “forever home”.  In our case the “forever” part is twofold: first, we have a beautiful piece of land and we’re building a home of our own design.  Second, and most importantly, after we build this puppy we’re not going to have enough money to move, even if we wanted to, so “forever home” is not that far off!

And I should beg your forgiveness right now, for this home building stuff has really turned my brain to mush.  I’m not the brightest bulb in the marquee on any day of the week (at best I’m the flickering one, not out, but not bright, either), but I am afflicted with confidence.  I’m one of those annoying people who say “Hey, sure, I can do _____ (fill-in-the-blank), how hard could it be?”  Insufficient brain power + confidence = decisions like designing your own home.  But since the old camp is gone, the hole is dug and the forms are poured (all on three of the worst autumn days you can imagine), it’s a bit late for lamenting.  


Let’s get back to throwing myself on the mercy of the readership.  In any event, I really am distracted more than usual (yes, go ahead, groan, I deserve it) but our genius 3L law students have come to rescue me, for this month we have articles by both Husna Lapidus and Dana Miller.  Husna has provided us with a great article on the history of Wikipedia, and, great gal that she is, even tied a “Harvest” theme into it.  Dana brings us her second article on Intellectual Property 101 with the first part of a two-part article on copyrights.  At our request, Dana has gone into a lot of detail on the subject at hand, and we’re sure that you will find it useful and interesting.  Jeong Oh is writing on New York State Venture Capital Programs and you’ll find several of my usual attempts at infotainment.

Keep an eye on your inbox, for next month we’ll have our Second Annual High-tech Holiday Gift Guide, which you might find useful, because we have actual young people who know and use the technologies doing the research.  We will cover the usual suspects like the iPod and latest mobile innovations, but we’re open to suggestions.  For instance, a person to whom I am close is pestering me to have the techies review home theatre options and innovations because the television decisions (and let’s be honest, remote holding) are his responsibility.  Color and design decisions are mine, but I don’t take television seriously enough to have responsibility for our video entertainment choices.


We'll leave you with our sincere wishes for a Happy Halloween, a whole lot of treats, probably of the sugary nature, and a little song.  I've heard that childhood memories become more vivid and "real" as we age, and I certainly hope that's true, for I don't seem to have much in the 1960's and 1970's memory banks.  Then this weekend we had a major windstorm at my house, and the leaves were a-flying everywhere and a Halloween tune we used to sing in Girl Scouts came back to me as clear as day.  Egads, yet another sign of aging...


Tonight is the night when dead leaves fly
Like witches on switches across the sky
When elf and sprite flit through the night
On a mooooooony sheen
It's Halloweeeeen...

Until next month, have lots of fun, take good care and be thankful I don't know any Thanksgiving songs...


Liz


 
            


More ...
 
 

Wiki Tiki Tavi

by Husan Lapidus

Editor's Note:

Husna Lapidus, Engineer, Law Student and mom-to-be, wrote this article on Wikipedia in keeping with our harvest theme, and I just love the tie-ins.  It didn't occur to me until I posted the article that "Wiki" is close to "wicca" and we're publishing this edition on All Hallow's Eve.  Coincidence or not?  You decide.

Liz

Wikipedia


If knowledge were seeds, the ultimate garden would be none other than Wikipedia.  If you have Internet access and an inquiring mind, you’ve almost certainly come across the giant free-content encyclopedia at least once.  You may have even contributed some of your own knowledge to it, allowing others interested in the same topics to harvest from it. 
Today, there are more than five million articles on varying subjects and it ranks among the top twenty most visited web sites.  Although there are numerous arguments and criticisms against the encyclopedia’s accuracy and reliability, it continues to grow both in size and popularity.

This article will explain where Wikipedia came from, how it developed into what it is today, how you can benefit from it and even start your own “wiki”!  

The Wikipedia Seedling

Wikipedia actually was a spin-off from earlier Nupedia, which was named for its claim to having neutral (or free of bias) encyclopedic content.  Nupedia, as opposed to Wikipedia, was compiled of articles from experts in various fields that went through rigorous review processes.   While that review process ensured credibility to the standards of encyclopedias like Britannica, it turned out to be too slow and tedious.  As such, the founders decided to convert the system into a wiki, which is a collaborative website that allows any users to modify the content of the site.  It was a tradeoff between accuracy and efficiency.  That means you, me, or Bozo the Clown could change, modify, delete, or create an article on any subject under the sun.  The risks, of course, are the addition of articles such as performing CPR on your new born child that have been written by Bozo.  This is the main criticism of the site in general – that if anyone can author or modify a wiki article, how can we be assured of its truth and accuracy?  The answer is that you can’t be sure, and relying on its content is entirely at your own risk.  Amazingly, accuracy wasn’t as much of a problem as the critics would have us believe.

There are still administrators that help ensure balance and truthfulness in the articles.  In fact, when comedian Steven Colbert went online to test the accuracy and reliability of a wiki article, he was pleasantly surprised.  He went to a wiki article on elephants and added a section explaining how the population of elephants has tripled in the last six months.  Within minutes, the accuracy of the section was disputed by other users and the information was corrected by the wiki administrators.  

GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL)

Most encyclopedias, both in print and online, are protected under copyright and have strict rules regarding the copying, modification, and redistribution of the articles within.  Wikipedia differs from those because it uses a scheme known as copyleft.  Copyleft is a play on copyright, but copyleft differs from copyright because it is meant to allow all users and recipients of a work of authorship to have all the same rights to study, use, modify, and redistribute it as the original author.  The only stipulation is that the user must allow any subsequent users the same privileges they had.  

Copyright is to a typical end-user licensing agreement, as copyleft is to the GNU Free Documentation License (GDFL).  The GDFL is the licensing agreement that employs the copyleft terms mentioned above, and the license that Wikipedia uses for all of its content, with the exception of images taken from other protected sources.

GNU is Not Unix

What is GNU, you ask?  Well, I can tell you what it’s not.  “GNU is not Unix,” and that’s what GNU stands for.  GNU = GNU is not Unix.  If you were to replace the acronym with its meaning, you’d get “GNU is not Unix is not Unix is not Unix…” and it’d go on ad infinitum.  
Apparently, this is a hilariously clever joke among computer geeks world-wide that is based on a commonly used recursive logic code found in many software programs.  Recursive coding has nothing to do with GNU, but maybe the creators really wanted to emphasize that GNU is absolutely not Unix.  

Unix is a commercial computer operating system, like Windows or Mac OSX, but is rarely used on personal computers.  Instead, it’s used to provide centralized computing over a network.  It’s typically known for it’s clarity in coding and simplified logic.   In contrast, GNU is a project – some might call it a political movement – that creates software, operating systems, compilers, end-user applications and other parts of a computing system.  GNU is also unlike Unix in that it’s free.  The GNU project’s principal contributor is the Free Software Foundation (), which generates most of its financial resources from individuals who support their philosophy of free software.

Free as in Ice Cream vs. Free as in Speech

The Free Software Foundation and the GNU project rely on this concept of open-source software, which boasts itself as being “free.”  However, many open-source software license agreements require payment for the software itself, support for that software, or both.  

Free software does not necessarily mean it won’t make a dent in your pocket book.  Instead, it means you have freedom with the software to use it for any purpose, access the source code, study the code, modify the code, redistribute the code to your friends, family and the public at large.  In fact, all of those activities are highly encouraged, activities the lack of which would jeopardize the progress of the open-source movement.  

How to set up your own Wiki/ Why you want your own Wiki

Considering that Wikipedia is one of many parts of the open-source universe, it is accessible to you to use, modify, redistribute, etc. however you may please.  Wikipedia is part of open-source because it makes its content free (as in ice-cream and as in speech).  Wikipedia is powered by MediaWiki, one of a number of software projects used for building wikis, and it happens to be free in both of those ways, too.
I used MediaWiki, the same software used for Wikipedia, to create a personal wiki, which I password-protected.  I used it so that collaborative work on a project could be done over the internet.  My peers and colleagues signed on to my wiki and were able to contribute their work on a project from their remote venues.  It eliminated the need for frequent meetings while creating a forum for all of us to contribute in writing to a single cause.  It also allowed for rapid editing of one another’s work, cutting the amount of time needed to complete a polished work of authorship.

Here’s how you can do the same for your next team project: 

MediaWiki can be installed on most modern websites, including personal ones.  If you’re unsure whether your personal website supports it, ask your service provider.  To get started, visit and download the software, using the “download” link under the welcome paragraph.  The downloaded package includes installation instructions in a file called “Install,” or you can go to , which gives you an assortment of resources for support through your install.   

It’s as simple as that!  Although a first timer to software will almost certainly come across some technical barriers, the good news is the open-source community is chock-full of people who love to help and there’s information galore that’s ripe for exploration. 
                
 
 

Copyrights: It's Not Just for Authors Anymore

by Dana N. Miller

This article is the second subject in a series of four designed to help brush up and dust off the cobwebby, ghoul-strewn recesses where we store all the information we learned somewhere along the way about intellectual property protections.  As we covered in August, this month’s topic du jour is copyright.  Unfortunately, copyright law is a bit more complicated than trade secrets, and this article is part 1 of 2. 

Copyright, Not Just for Authors Anymore (Part 1)


It would be easy to sit back and think that in today’s age of technology, innovation, and commercialization, the preservation of intellectual property through copyright protections is outmoded or superfluous.  However, the steady stream of cases concerning infringement of authored original works suggests the opposite.  Dan Brown’s book, The DaVinci Code (1); songs, like “Baby Boy”, by Grammy-award winning musical artist (please hold your criticisms, folks) Beyonce (2) several internet giants' sites like eBay (3), Google (4) and YouTube (5)  and computing entities like Microsoft (6) and Linus (7) all create and possess subject matter involved in recent lawsuits where they have alleged or disputed claims of copyright infringement.  The need for copyright protection, wisely anticipated by the founders of this country, remains ever-present today, just as it did at its legal conception in this country.  

First, a Brief History…

In the United States, authority for the regulation and implementation of copyright protection stems from Article I, section 8, clause 8 of the United States Constitution, which provides that Congress has the power “[t]o Promote the progress of Science and the useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries. (8) This seemingly simple phrase grants Congress the authority to create legislation which protects the works of authors and inventors.  The language has been interpreted such that “science” actually means works produced by authors and that “useful arts” refers to inventions.  Without getting into the nitty-gritty of the grammatical syntax of this clause, which is more complex than the simplicity of the words indicates, each endowment establishes whether copyright or patent protection is warranted and rewards the corresponding creator of the respective product with appropriate, limited rights (i.e. for those of you who remember SAT analogies: science: authors: writings :: useful arts : inventors : discoveries).  Though grammatically tricky, the clause strategically establishes that writings are protected by granting exclusive rights to authors AND that inventions are protected by granting exclusive rights to inventors, though both are constrained in their exclusive rights by time limitations. 
Why would our nation’s forefathers construct such a complicated grant of authority to Congress in this fashion?  They knew that they needed to balance the exclusivity necessary to protect writings and inventions—intellectual property—against the need of a developing country to encourage future innovation (progress, both technical and humanitarian).  The clause balances authors’ and inventors’ goals of recognition and control over ownership by protecting their rights through limited exclusion of others, thereby encouraging authors and inventors to write and invent more.  However, the founders also recognized that if those exclusive rights were so protective as to never allow others to utilize the writings or inventions, no future authors or inventors would have the incentive to produce additional writings or inventions.  A lack of future authors and inventors would impede the founders’ goals of encouraging and facilitating the nation’s scientific and humanitarian progress.  Thus, the Constitution acknowledges that writers and inventors should have some exclusive rights to the works they produce; however, those rights are constrained by time limits as established by Congress.  

Congress responded to the constitutional grant of authority to protect works of science and the useful arts by enacting the first copyright act in 1790.  Since then, legislated copyright protection in the United States has experienced several iterations, and today, we have a comprehensive act, enacted in 1976, which has been amended to reflect the adoption of international treaties, such as the Berne Convention and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and to address copyright concerns in areas of developing technology.  Additional copyright protections, though limited, are available through common law and are incorporated through each individual state’s case precedents, but these limitations lay outside the scope of this article.  Our focus is the Copyright Act of 1976: the touchstone of copyright law in this country.  

Delineated by chapters, the Copyright Act of 1976 (Copyright Act) establishes: 1) subject matter and scope of copyright protection; 2) copyright ownership and transfer rights; 3) duration of copyright; 4) formalities which govern notice, deposit and registration with the copyright office; 5) copyright infringement and remedies; 6) manufacturing and importation requirements and limitations (specifically dealing with copies); 7) responsibilities of the copyright office and corresponding authors’ duties to the office; 8) proceedings by copyright royalty judges; 10) copyright specifications unique to digital audio recording devices and media; 11) copyright specifications unique to sound recordings and music videos; 12) copyright protection and management systems; and 13) protection of original designs.  Fortunately for you, dear readers, the primary interest of this two-part article is to broadly discuss the first five chapters of the Copyright Act as they potentially impact your affairs and work products.  I humbly defer to licensed legal professionals, who are admitted to practice, to advise you further on these matters and the intricacies of your specific individual, academic, or technical needs.   

While a complete study of the Copyright Act is the center of entire courses in law school, this two-part article will focus on: the essence of what copyright protection covers (subject matter); the standard for protection (elements necessary to establish a copyright); the scope and duration of protection (i.e. how expansive or limited the available protection is and for how long a time period); what disclosure is required and the cost of protection; the extent of others rights (including fair use exceptions and what it means for a work to be in the public domain); and, finally, what constitutes infringement and what remedies are available to copyright owners.  This first part is dedicated to analysis of section 102 of the Copyright Act.  

Section 102 of the Copyright Act states:


Copyright protection subsists … in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device (9).  

What and How Copyright Protects

Essentially, copyright protection grants a limited monopoly for the author on the particular expression of an idea.  How does it do this and what does the statute mean?  Broken down into its elements, three requirements must be satisfied for an author to receive copyright protection: 1) a qualified work, 2) expressed as an original idea, 3) which is fixed in a tangible medium.  This article will address each of these elements.  

Subject Matter

First, an author must produce a work that qualifies as the kind of subject matter protected by copyright.  In essence, a work of authorship must be within the scope of copyright protection.  Many works of authorship satisfy this requirement as suggested by section 102 of the Copyright Act, including, but not limited to: 
  • Literary works: may take the form of articles, books, poems, advertisements, basically anything other than audiovisual works expressed in words, numbers, or other verbal or numerical symbols, including some computer programs
  • Musical works including the score and lyrics
  • Dramatic works including text and accompanying music
  • Pantomimes and choreographic works
  • Pictorial, graphic and sculptural works
  • Motion pictures and other audiovisual works
  • Sound recordings
  • Architectural works
The legislative history of the Copyright Act makes clear that Congress intended this list to be merely suggestive and not an exhaustive itemization of acceptable subject matter. 
Provided that the other elements of originality and fixation are met (as discussed below), courts are generally willing to liberally construe acceptable subject matter and apply copyright protections.  Such broad construction means that virtually any creative expression, excluding mere ideas, procedures, processes, systems, methods of operation, concepts, principles, or discoveries, may be protected by copyright subject matter.  (Now, before you start mourning the lack of protection for this information, keep in mind that many of the exclusions may be protected by patent law, which will be covered in a future article.)  So, a haiku or limerick, a newsletter article, a blog, a song, a play, a newspaper advertisement, a home movie, 2- or 3-dimensional art or drawings, a voice mail message, a building, a website, a recorded speech, a slideshow, some forms of software code, a business plan, … (you get the idea) are all acceptable forms of subject matter under the Copyright Act.  

Originality

Second, we must understand what constitutes an original idea under the terms of the statute.  The language requires originality, which, though not defined in the definitional section of the statute, courts have determined to mean that the expression is an independent creation and espouses a modicum of creativity.  Though bare facts cannot be protected as an original expression, if an author demonstrates that sufficient creative choices were made in compiling or expressing the data or facts, such expression may be protected by copyright.  For example, while an alphabetical list of names and corresponding phone numbers in a phone book is not protectable because the facts are compiled in a way that anyone would choose to organize the data, a compilation of names and factual data about a retail stores’ customers may be protected by copyright because of the nature of the selection and arrangement of the compilation.  Other proof of creative expression, such as word choices and imaginative arrangements, will support a court in finding originality.  

Additionally, courts avoid determinations of artistic merit in defining what constitutes creativity, and for good policy reasons: we, as a society, do not want lawyers or judges telling us what is art and what isn’t!  A seminal case demonstrating this principle evaluated circus advertisements which replicated the scenes from the circus acts.  There, the court held that advertisements were not removed from the realm of original expression even though the expression was promotional material consisting of facts and representations of actual events.  Instead, courts hold that while artistic quality or merit is not necessary to satisfy the statute, proof that the work is original and not copied is essential.  Under this logic, newspaper ads, television commercials (yes, even infomercials), news broadcasts, and newspaper articles may all contain original expressions despite their heavy reliance on facts and events in the content.  

Finally, there is no requirement that the work be entirely novel or unique: fifteen authors could all write books about the life of Benjamin Franklin, and, using the same facts about Franklin’s life, the historical period, his inventions, family, social, political and scientific contributions, each author can write an entirely original book.  Conversely, a doctrine exists (the Merger Doctrine) establishing that in situations where the facts cannot be separated from the expression, as in instructions and rules for a contest or a book which describes an accounting method, such an expression may not be protected by copyright.  As you can imagine, this exception is fairly limited to situations where facts are of equal or more importance than the creative expression in which they are framed.  Merger occurs when virtually all authors would express the information in a similar way: for example, the description of an individual plant, flower or tree in a guide book or a history of the timeline of events of the French Revolution.  This doctrine is employed when the facts merge with the expression.  Similarly, where specific elements necessarily follow from an unprotected idea (remember, mere ideas cannot be protected by copyright), such as cowboys wearing cowboy hats, wrangling horses and riding on the range or witches wearing pointed hats, black capes and riding broomsticks, these interpretations cannot be protected by copyright (this is called the scenes á faire exception and is usually used to counter an infringement claim of a dramatic work, i.e. the plot structure of a play).   

Fixation

Third, and lastly in terms of what this article addresses, the original expression of the work must be fixed in a tangible medium to satisfy the terms of the statute.  Fortunately, fixation is explained in the definitional section of the Copyright Act and also by the terms of section 102.  The Copyright Act states that: 

 
a work is ‘fixed’ in a tangible medium of expression when its embodiment in a copy or phonorecords, by or under the authority of the author, is sufficiently permanent or stable to permit it to be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated for a period of more than transitory duration (10).  

This means that a work is fixed at the moment when an author reduces or authorizes his or her original expression to be reduced to a permanent representation in a complete format and that format exists for a length of time exceeding a transitory period.  For example, after a poet has transcribed his or her poem on paper with pen or typewriter ink, or today, once the word processing document has been saved on the hard drive of the computer, after the artist has formed the clay into a creative form and shape, once the play has been written or the performance has been video taped, or once the lecturer has authorized the transcription of his or her lecture, then the work is fixed within the definition of the statute.  

Further, Congress also defined “copies” and “creation” in the definitional section to clarify fixation.  Congress’s definition of creation establishes that creation occurs when the work is fixed in a copy for the first time.  Additionally, copies are material objects wherein a work is fixed and by which the work can be directly perceived or with the aid of a machine or device.  This means that when a speaker records or video tapes his or her presentation at a conference, the copy of the recording or video tape, though not the original expression itself, is enough to fulfill the statute’s requirement for fixation.  Also, when several variations of a work are recorded over a period of time or different versions are prepared, each copy is evaluated as a separate fixed work.  Fortunately, Congress possessed enough forethought to embed sufficient leeway into the statute for future, and yet undeveloped, forms of fixation that didn’t exist at the time the act was written.  This elbow room has allowed for authors to fix their expressions in magnetic tape, video tape, digital format, and many other forms, so long as the fixation can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated for more than a transitory period of time.  Indeed, even the content of a website situated on a computer server for a brief duration of time may be enough to satisfy the statutory requirement.  

End of Part 1, Please Flip The Tape


Just kidding, there is no tape to flip (although I think I just dated myself since kids these days are only familiar with compact disks, but that is neither here nor there I suppose), this is where we’ll break for part one of our analysis of copyright protections.  In summary, the importance and relevance of copyright protection, especially in a technologically progressive age, maintains its significance.  Congress, through the Copyright Act, established a means by which authors of any fixed original work of acceptable subject matter may be protected.  To determine whether a particular work satisfies the statutory requirements, the initial inquiry involves consideration of the work’s subject matter, originality, and fixation.  Finally, while none of these elements in isolation presents a threshold too difficult to overcome, all three criteria must be met to place the work in the realm of copyright protection. 

For Next Time…


In November, part two of this article will address your burning questions about copyright protection.  Scope, duration and cost of protection, including public domain; disclosure requirements, including registration and other formalities; rights of others; infringement and remedies will all be discussed in detail.  Additionally, specialized legislation designed to increase or limit copyright protections will be introduced.  We hope you can make it back for the conclusion of this riveting analysis, and, in the meantime, keep your eyes primed for examples of copyrighted works—my favorites are the mottoes and slogans on fast food and church signs—and we’ll jump right back into things in a few weeks.  


1 Associated Press, Judge Rejects Claims In “Da Vinci” Suit, available at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12202180/ (last visited Oct. 16, 2006).
2 Music World Entertainment, Beyoncé Wins Copyright Infringement Lawsuit, available at http://www.urbanmecca.com/artman/publish/article_934.shtml (last visited Oct. 17, 2006). 
3 eBay Inc. v. MercExchange LLP 126 U.S. 1837 (2006) available at http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/05pdf/05-130.pdf (last visited Oct. 17, 2006), see also Patently-O, Supreme Court Vacates eBay Injunction, available at http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2006/05/supreme_court_v.html (last visited Oct. 17, 2006). 
4  Peter Lattman, Google Loses Closely Watched Copyright Case,  Wall St. J. Online (Feb. 22, 2006), available at http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2006/02/22/google-loses-closely-watched-copyright-case/  (last visited Oct. 17, 2006); see also Breitbart, U.S. Judge: Google Infringed Copyright By Posting Thumbnail Porn Photos, Breitbart (Feb. 22, 2005), available at http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/21/060222032100.1rc2m2wg.html (last visited Oct. 17, 2006). 
5 Greg Sandoval, YouTube Sued Over Copyright Infringement, available at http://news.com.com/2100-1030_3-6095736.html (last visited Oct. 17, 2006). 
6 Cyrus Farivar, Microsoft Sues Viodentia For Copyright Infringement, available at http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/26/microsoft-sues-viodenta-for-copyright-infringement/ (last visited Oct. 17, 2006). 
7 Stephen Shankland, Years Into Case, SCO Asserts Copyright Infringement Claim, CNET NEWS.COM (Jan. 6, 2006), available at http://news.com.com/Years+into+case,+SCO+asserts+copyright+infringement/2100-1016_3-6022453.html (last visited Oct. 17, 2006), see also Tom Krazit, Judge Whittles Down SCO Claims Against IBM, CNET NEWS.COM (Jun. 30, 2006), available at http://news.com.com/Judge+whittles+down+SCO+claims+against+IBM/2100-1014_3-6090252.html?tag=st.ref.goo (last visited Oct. 17, 2006). 
8 U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 8. 
9 Copyright Act 17 U.S.C. §102 (1976). 
10 Copyright Act 17 U.S.C. §101 (1976).
                
 
 

Harvesting New York State Venture Capital Funds

by Jeong Han Oh

Harvesting New York State Venture Capital Funds




In keeping with our "harvest" and "treat" theme, this month we will highlight the types of nontraditional investment capital available for emerging companies in New York State.  The information provided in this article intended for companies in early development seeking seed capital, to companies looking for funding for product development, to companies needing late-stage investing.  The venture capital programs highlighted here provide a wide range of risk capital including traditional venture capital, buyout, corporate financing, and mezzanine investments.   Unlike the numerous private investment vehicles, New York State’s investment programs are New York-centric and focused on improving the state’s economy while providing a market rate of return to the investment fund.  New York State has recognized that venture capital investment can be a major economic driver in the state and has strategically focused on increasing the level of the pool of capital for businesses that will provide the greatest possible return on investment and economic growth.  The State’s venture capital programs target high-tech industries because they want to invest in businesses that have the potential for high growth leading to more jobs in New York. 

New York State currently supports three venture capital programs totaling more than $825 million dollars.  The largest of the three, and the most talked about program, is the New York State Common Retirement Fund’s, In-State Private Equity Investment Program (Retirement Fund) administered by the Office of the State Comptroller, Division of Pension Investment and Cash Management with approximately $425 million available for venture investments.  The second largest venture fund program worth $400 million is the Certified Capital Company Program  (CAPCO) administered by the New York State Insurance Department.   The third of the three venture programs is also the oldest is the Small Business Technology Investment Fund (SBTIF) managed by the Urban Development Corporation also known as the Empire State Development Authority. 

New York State Common Retirement Fund In-State Private Equity Investment Program 
The Common Retirement Fund (CRF), managed by the State Comptroller, was established in 1999 as part of the “J2K” economic development initiative by the New York State Legislature.   The CRF is the largest investment capital program in the State with a diverse group of fund managers interested in promoting economic development in New York by targeting emerging businesses that are in dire need of capital.

Since the inception of the CRF, the Fund has made available $425 million of capital to fifteen different managers for investments in New York State.  The $425 million of the CRF has resulted in attracting additional investments from the private sector of more than $325 million dollars that is now part of the investment pool of capital available to New York companies. 

The CRF provides venture capital financing by investing in companies that are in need of traditional venture capital, buyout/corporate finance, and mezzanine assistance.  The Funds proactively seeks out emerging technology companies that have potential for high growth such as nanotechnology, biotechnology and homeland security.
The Comptroller ensures investments meet the highest standard of fiduciary duty by requiring that fund managers meet minimum standards.  There are fifteen fund managers in the CRF’s investment program who possess a successful track record of making private equity investments.   Anyone interested in seeking capital under the CRF should contact the following fund managers attached to this article.

New York State Common Retirement Fund’s (CRF) Portfolio
New York State Certified Capital Company Program (CAPCO)


The Certified Capital Company Program was a statutory creation by the New York State Legislature and is codified in Section 11 of the Tax Law.  The CAPCO program was created in 1997 to increase the pool of venture capital in New York with the purpose of spurring the growth of businesses and employment in New York State.  The CAPCO program is not your usual venture capital program in that there are no actual State dollars involved.  Instead, the program provides a 100% tax credit incentive to insurance companies that invest in certified capital companies who are in turn required to invest in qualified New York State companies.  Thus far, the State has implemented five rounds of the CAPCO program.  In 1998 Program One created $100 million of tax credit, in 1999, 2000, 2004 and 2005, the Legislature added four additional programs.  Programs Two, Three, Four, and Five created $30 million, $150 million, $60 million and $60 million, respectively, in tax credit incentives.   Due to Program One, Program Two, and Program Three CAPCO was required to invest 50% of its certified capital in qualified businesses half of which had to be in “early stage” businesses. 


The Insurance Department certified five active CAPCOs in each of the first three programs, six active CAPCOs in Program Four and seven CAPCOs in Program Five.  The types of investments made by CAPCOs range from equity seed funding to debt financing. 


NAME
Address
Phone Number
Advantage Capital Partners
521 Madison Avenue, 7th Floor
New York, NY 10022
212-893-8600
Enhanced Capital Partners
350 Park Avenue, 24th Floor
New York, NY 10022
212-207-3385
New York Small Business Venture Fund, LLC c/o New York City Investment Fund, LLC
One Battery Park Plaza, 5th Floor
New York, NY 10004
212-493-7587
Stonehenge Capital Fund New York, LLC
152 W. 57th Street, 20 th Floor
New York, NY 10019
212-944-2542
Whitecap New York Growth Fund, LLC
747 3rd Avenue, 22nd Floor
New York, NY 10017
212-747-7474
Wilshire Advisers, LLC
100 Quentin Roosevelt Blvd., Ste. 408
Garden City, NY 11530

516-390-2252
A qualified business is a company that is independently owned and operated that meets the following criteria:

A.  It is headquartered in New York state, and its principal business operations are located in New York state, and the qualified investment it receives is used solely to support its business operations in the state, except for advertising, promotions and sales purposes.  In cases where the qualified investment is made in a start-up company, capital must be used solely to establish and support its business operations in New York State, except for advertising, promotions and sales purposes.

B.  It has either (i) no more than one hundred employees, at least eighty percent of whom are employed in New York state or, (ii) no more than two hundred employees, at least eighty percent of whom are employed in this state, and during the fiscal year immediately preceding the qualified  investment it had, together with its affiliates, gross  revenues of no more than five million dollars, on a consolidated basis as determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, except that, with respect to certified capital company program three and certified capital company program four and certified capital company program five, in the case of a company located in an empire zone, gross revenues cannot exceed eight million dollars.

C. It is involved in commerce for the purpose of developing and manufacturing products and systems, including but not limited to high technology products and systems such as computers, computer software,  medical equipment, biotechnology, telecommunications equipment and products, processing or assembling all types of products, conducting research and development on all types of products or providing services, but excluding real estate, real estate development, insurance and businesses  predominantly engaged in professional services provided by accountants, lawyers or physicians.   

D. The business was not organized by a certified capital company or an affiliate of a certified capital company, but does not prohibit a certified capital company from providing financial, technical or similar advice to a business before making an investment in such business. 
   
E. The business does not have a financial relationship, such as an ownership interest, investment interest, or compensation agreement, with a certified capital company or any affiliate of a certified capital company before the date on which a certified capital company makes its first investment in the business, but does not prohibit a certified capital company from  providing financial, technical or similar advice to a business before making an investment in such business.  
  

Small Business Technology Investment Fund (SBTIF)

The Small Business Technology Investment Fund was created in the early 1980’s under auspices of the former New York State Science and Technology Foundation.  Now, the SBTIF program is administered by the Urban Development Corporation doing business under the Empire State Development Authority.  The SBTIF provides start-up high-tech companies in New York with a source of venture capital.  The Fund makes early stage investments in companies that develop innovative technologies with high growth potential.
To be eligible for SBTIF investments, companies require 3:1 matching funds that may include private sector capital.  Most investments made under SBTIF range from $50,000 to $500,000 and take the form of preferred or common stock.  The SBTIF’s due diligence process for considering a company for investment are as follows:

  • Evaluation of company history, investors, and board of directors;
  • Assessment of the management team;
  • Analysis of market potential for the product or service and size of market;
  • Relevance of technology presented and level of protection (patents, trade secrets, etc.);
  • Evaluation of actual and potential competition;
  • Financial analysis of proposed plan in terms of the company’s valuation;
  • Potential for creating jobs in New York State
For more information contact Empire State Development at 1-800-STATE-NY or 1-800 782-8369, or by e-mail at sbtif@empire.state.ny.us
                
 
 

If You Don't Vote...


    
Let’s be honest: last month we rewrote the lyrics to “The Ballad of Jed Clampett” and, journalistically speaking, you probably can’t go much lower and no one unsubscribed (though we're sure you considered it), which means that silly layered upon a serious topic, works, at least sometimes

So, as we put the final touches on our Halloween/Harvest edition, we wanted to send you away with a few final observations.  First, you should know that we resisted the urge to call this month’s Innovation e-Review either the “Rocktober” or “Hauntober” edition, we leave those attempts at marketing tie-ins to the oldies rock and roll stations and the Disney Channel, respectively.  Second, since the Christmas and Channukah merchandise has been in the stores since September, well, we feel emboldened to appropriate a little bit o’ the holidays for this edition.  In our defense, it's for a good cause, nonetheless, we’re stooping to another level entirely and we're inviting you along for the ride.  

Yep, your friends at the Innovation e-Review are back in the re-writing business again, but this time it’s not a song, it’s an editorial.  Now don’t think we’ve gone all academic on you and rewritten some scholarly work, heck, you should know better that that.  We know you folks read scholarly stuff all day and let’s face it, even the most serious of scholars, such as yourselves, need a little comic relief every now and again.  That’s where we come into play.  So, without further self-delusion, we give you our version of the most famous editorial of all time: Yes, Virginia, There is a Santa Claus.


“Yes, Americans, there are reasons to vote”
Here’s a little background, or, as a co-worker (and aspiring wag) suggested “The method to my madness” (and yes, he is getting a lump of coal in another 56 days):

In 1897, 8 year old Virginia O’Hanlon of New York City wrote her now famous letter to the editor of the New York Sun (a defunct New York City-based daily).  Her letter was brief but poignant, and evoked a response from Francis Pharcellus Church, the Sun’s editor, that has become the most reprinted editorial of all time.  Here we offer our own version:

Dear Editor:

I am forty mumble-mumble years old.  Some of my little friends say there is no reason to vote.  Jeong Oh says, ‘If you see it in the Innovation e-Review it’s so.’  Please tell me the truth; is there a reason to vote?

NewYorkia


NewYorkia, your little friends are wrong.  They have been affected by the skepticism of a skeptical age.  They do not believe except what they see.  They think nothing can be which is not comprehensible by their little minds.  All minds, NewYorkia, whether they be men’s, women’s or children’s are little.  In this great universe of ours , a person is a mere insect, an ant, in their intellect, as compared with the boundless world around us, as measured by the intelligence capable of grasping the whole of truth and knowledge.

Yes, NewYorkia, there are reasons to vote.  Voting is a loving and generous act that says you are devoted to your country and after voting you will abound with beauty and joy.  Alas! How dreary would be our country if we could not vote!  It would be as dreary as if there were no NewYorkia’s.  There would be no child-like faith then, no justice, no fairness to make tolerable this existence.  We should have no enjoyment, except in sense and sight.  The eternal light with which the beacon of American freedom fills with world would be extinguished.

Not believe in voting!  You might as well not believe in the future!  You might think you have to know everything about all the candidates on November 7 to vote, but no one does, and even if you did, what would that prove?  Nobody knows everything about any issue or candidate, but that is no reason not to vote.  The most important things in the world are those that neither children nor adults can see.  Did you ever have a presidential candidate in your living room?  Of course not, but they are out there, in someone’s living room, talking about issues.  Nobody can conceive or imagine all the wonders there are unseen or unseeable in our country’s progress, yet they will come. 

You can tear apart the voting machine and see what is inside, but there is a unseeable fabric holding our country together which not the strongest people, nor even the united strength of all the strongest people who ever lived, could tear apart.  Only faith, courage, freedom, love and hope can strengthen that fabric and only then can you view and picture the supernal beauty and glory that is our country.  Is it all real?  Ah, NewYorkia, in all this world there is nothing else real and abiding.

No voting!  Thanks to us, voting lives and will live forever.  A thousand years from now, NewYorkia, nay, ten times ten thousand years from now, we will continue to make glad the hearts of Americans by getting out and voting.  

Let us be among the many media outlets this month that urge all of you to exercise your constitutional right (some would say obligation) to vote in this - and every – election.  And ladies of New York, we are under special obligation to vote, for New York was a hotbed of women’s suffrage activity in the 1800’s, the women’s suffrage movement’s most well known leader, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, was born in and lived in New York State and the first women’s suffrage convention was held in 1848 in Seneca Falls, New York.  With such a proud tradition in our fair state, we all have an obligation to honor the efforts of our sisters and get out and vote.  

See you at the polls!
        
    
 
 

Harvest Time


Harvest Time in Old New York  


Because our state is so geographically and economically diverse, we New Yorkers are never far from a farmstand or greenmarket, though it’s not all that easy to find New York state produce in your local supermarket, which makes no sense to us.  I mean, really, who is buying those mealy hothouse tomatoes in August, when the New York state tomatoes are red, ripe and ready?  What?  You’re buying them?  Well, my friend, unless you like those and other pale excuses for fresh produce, read on for some tips on how to find the fresh stuff.  

But before we get into resources, let’s look at a few statistics on New York State agriculture and talk about the economic impact of agriculture on New York State.
For 2005 (the most recent year for which numbers are available), New York state had 35,600 farms, 7.55 million acres of farm land, which is more land devoted to farming than our entire neighbor and sister state, Vermont has within its borders!  We’re not all Manhattan citified glitz and glamour here in The Empire State, though that is the image the world holds.  
 
The world also doesn’t know that as of January 1, 2006 the Empire State housed 1.4 million cattle grazing, being milked or – gulp – being butchered, 83,000 hogs and pigs and 75,000 sheep doing much of the same (well, to our knowledge no pigs are commercially milked, but a sheep are and produce creamy-yet-tart feta cheese).  Our 648,000 milk cows, as opposed to the end-up-on-your-plate cows, produce a whopping 12.1 billion pounds of raw milk, for an average of 18,639 pounds per cow.  Folks, that is a staggering number, because although there are those who say it’s a dubious distinction (this is the same faction of people who believes that milking cows is tantamount to animal abuse, but we won’t get into that debate today), we say it’s money in our state coffers, for the 2002 Census of Agriculture tells us the market value of New York agricultural products sold is over $3.1 billion dollars (I can’t resist saying “That’s 3.1 billion dollars”.  If only the lotto jackpot was that high, maybe I would remember to buy a ticket, but I doubt it.)  
The Empire State ranks #3 in the United States in production of “milk and other dairy products from cows”, “ducks” and “corn for silage” and #6 in “fruit, tree nuts and berries”.  Overall New York agriculture ranks #26 in the nation, which is fairly equal to our size, #27 out of 51 states (the list includes Washington, D.C.).  

Our farms produce crops that range from alfalfa to winter wheat and include significant amounts of beans, hay, potatoes, corn, maple syrup, apples, peaches and Christmas trees, but not significant enough amounts of tobacco or cotton to report.  And speaking of tobacco, in 2003 New York state was #5 in the United States for seizure of the other tobacco, you know, the wacky kind, as “Marijuana Eradication” statistics by the United States Drug Enforcement Administration report.  A measly 95,385 pounds of weed was confiscated or destroyed while still in the ground, I guess that means so much for all those “marijuana is the number one cash crop” arguments you used to year.   (These numbers only count still-planted pot and don’t count marijuana confiscated from our careless youth by parents, school officials, law enforcement officers or fellow druggies.)

In any event, agriculture means a lot to New York, both historically and currently, and in our ongoing effort to promote New York-based businesses and improve our state’s economic bottom line(s), we bring you a few resources which may assist you in endeavoring to put more New York products in your home.

But before you find that local source for cider or maple syrup, you simply must take the “What does your favorite apple say about you” personality profile found at the New York Apple Country website.  Of the varieties listed, I like Macoun the best, which in apple parlance means I am “Sharp and fun…to the point and don’t like to hang around”.  Unfortunately they don’t have a listing for “Winesap”, (an actual cultivar), just think of the fun to be had with that moniker.

Anyway, the quiz, and all sorts of other apple-related trivia, recipes, picking spots and other priceless apple info is here:

Quiz:

http://www.nyapplecountry.com/personalityprofiles.htm

Homepage:


http://www.nyapplecountry.com/index.htm

The virtues of the good health that can be had from eating apples, including improved lung, brain and heart functions, can be learned at the “Apples Prevent” website below.  They’re not just “Nature’s Toothbrush” anymore, they’re a cancer prevention agent.  Woo hoo, bring on the apples!   

http://www.applesprevent.com/

And just in case you’re wondering what you can do with apples (besides throw rotten ones at certain newsletter writers), there is the cider site.  Yes, it’s true, New York has www.nycider.com, which not only extols the virtues of cider, but gives us cider history, cider nutrition, cider purchase points, cider recipes and, hmmm, cider adult beverage info.  Now, I ask you, what’s not to like about that site?  We will interject a highly personal opinion here, and that’s to not purchase the pasteurized cider.  Yes, they tell you it tastes the same but it doesn’t, it tastes like apple juice.  Find a producer that uses an ultraviolet light filter and the cider will be safe from e-coli and other nasties *and* taste like real cider should taste.  Note: you may have to venture to a farmstand or small store to get ultraviolet light-filtered cider, many supermarkets only carry fully pasteurized products.  But believe me, the difference is huge, and you will not be sorry.  Try it for breakfast instead of your usual shot of citrus, over ice with an ounce of bourbon for a tasty, late-fall, grown-up treat, as a marinade for a pork roast (recipe to follow), as a substitute for water or milk in a baking recipe, or warmed with a dash of cinnamon and an ounce of orange juice for a bedtime indulgence.  



Happy fall feasting!

Cider-Brined Pork Roast

Generously salt and pepper a 2 pound pork tenderloin, rub all over with generous helping of dried sage and submerge tenderloin in a 50% water, 50% cider mixture.  (It’s called ‘brining’ and it makes pork and poultry moist and tender, even when grilling the lean cuts of meat.)  Grill 8 minutes on one side, 7 on the other, then turn the grill off, put the lid down and let the tenderloin “rest” for 6 minutes (this fully distributes the juices) or cook in a moderate oven for 20 or so minutes until your instant read thermometer says 185° F, remove from the oven, tent with foil and let it rest for 5-10 minutes.  Serve with rice, roasted acorn squash and fresh applesauce for a real fall meal. 
            
 
 

No Tricks, No Treats, Just the News!

by Dana, Husna and Marissa

You'll think you're trick or treating in an upscale development this edition, for thank to our students, we have plenty of treats to share!  Happy reading.

Havana Club Trademark Dispute Riles U.S. and Cuban Governments

U.S. agencies are involved in the Bacardi - Havana Club trademark dispute to which CubaExport claims priority. Cuba says that the dispute resolution body in the WTO which rendered a decision in its favor has been ignored by the U.S. and demonstrates the U.S. attempt to usurp the trademark.

WTO
http://www.adti.net/ip/Daily_report_executives_061201.html

http://www.adti.net/ip/Daily_report_executives_061201.htmlhttp://www.adti.net/ip/Daily_report_executives_061201.html

Cuba

http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2006/octubre/saba7/42comunicado-i.html

http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2006/octubre/saba7/42comunicado-i.html
http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2006/octubre/saba7/42comunicado-i.html

U.S.: 

http://www.wptn.com/back00/tmrk_020_sep00.html


http://www.wptn.com/back00/tmrk_020_sep00.html


http://www.wptn.com/back00/tmrk_020_sep00.html

Miami Herald: 

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/15320498.htm

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/15320498.htm

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/15320498.htm


http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/15320498.htm


Warner Chilcott Settles for Permanent Injunction with FTC

Finalizing the pharmaceutical companys litigation with the Federal Trade Commission, Warner Chilcott was permanently enjoined by the District Court of the District of Columbia. This order protects consumers by preventing the unlawful delayed entry of generic pharmaceuticals into the marketplace.

FTC: 

http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/0410034/0410034.htm

http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/0410034/0410034.htm

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/10-20-2006/0004456269&EDATE


Case Precedent Doesnt Negate Licensees Obligation to Pay Royalties

Case Precedent Doesnt Negate Licensees Obligation to Pay Royalties

FTC: 

http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/0410034/0410034.htm

http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/0410034/0410034.htm

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/10-20-2006/0004456269&EDATE


Case Precedent Doesnt Negate Licensees Obligation to Pay Royalties

Case Precedent Doesnt Negate Licensees Obligation to Pay Royalties

FTC: 

http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/0410034/0410034.htm

http://www.ftc.gov/os/caselist/0410034/0410034.htm

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/10-20-2006/0004456269&EDATE


Case Precedent Doesnt Negate Licensees Obligation to Pay Royalties

Case Precedent Doesnt Negate Licensees Obligation to Pay Royalties

The Federal Circuit, maintaining that licensees cant have their cake and eat it too, determined that licensees must continue to pay royalties despite a court finding that the licensed patent is invalid. Holding that licensees cannot invoke the Supreme Courts Lear Doctrine, which protects a licensee, un til the licensee ceases payments and provides notice of the breach for grounds of patent invalidity. 


ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/10-20-2006/0004456269&EDATE

ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/10-20-2006/0004456269&EDATE


No Test Tubes? Debate on Virtual Science Classes

New software that simulates basic laboratory science experiments is now available for students to use.  Some say it’s a good replacement for real-life hands-on experiments because the simulated versions are cheaper and safer for students.  But is there any real replacement for the experience a lab environment can offer?  For students in poorer districts where the schools don’ t even have science labs, this might be the only way for underprivileged students to get the experience necessary to make them competitive applicants to college.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20810FC3D5B0C738EDDA90994DE404482


Wondering how to be an Extra-Festive Geek this Halloween?

Just follow the lead of the makers of this jack-o-lantern computer!  With exhaust fans for eyes, a disc-drive in the mouth, and “Intel Inside,” you’ll earn bragging rights this Halloween.  Heck, you may even make up for the pathetic ghost costume you end up sporting for the third year in a row...


http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/pcs/pumpkin-computer-just-like-mom-used-to-make-209299.php

Indemnity Protection to Open-Source Customers

Open-Logic is a company involved in the conflict between SCO and IBM for the misuse of Unix code in IBM’ s contribution to Linux.  Open-Logic expressed to customers who have downloaded the free software and paid for its support, that they need not fear law suits.  Instead, Open-Logic offers indemnity from intellectual property infringement lawsuits.


http://news.com.com/Open-source+firm+offers+to+protect+customers+from+lawsuits/2100-7344_3-6126797.html?tag=html.alert

Open-Source Graphics Driver has Security Flaw

Usually, open-source projects have fewer security risks.  With this flaw, a remote user could hack into the graphics driver and take over the system.  The driver manufacturer, Nvidia, is confident that a patch will be available shortly.


http://news.com.com/Exploit+code+released+for+Nvidia+flaw/2100-1002_3-6126846.html?tag=html.alert

Court says neutral party must examine hard drive in file-sharing case

In future file-sharing lawsuits initiated by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), examination of the defendant’s personal hard-drives must be done by independent third parties.  

http://news.com.com/A+bottom-up+approach+to+tech/2008-1014_3-6125940.html?tag=html.alert


Who’s next for Yahoo in the world of mergers?

Microsoft’s patent dispute with AT&T could determine the reach of U.S. patents overseas.  Microsoft had argued unsuccessfully before the appeals court that liability should not extend to products sold overseas because software is not a product "component" under U.S. patent law, and because copies of the software were made overseas, rather than in the United States.  


http://money.cnn.com/2006/10/28/magazines/fortune/yahoo.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2006102812


Shutterfly, the story of a Dot-com marathon...


Shutterfly, an online photo printing service finally crossed a finish line of sorts when it became one of just a few e-commerce companies to go public since the dot-com bust.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/technology/30shutterfly.html?ei=5099&en=25c7601dd523c716&ex=1162789200&adxnnl=1&partner=TOPIXNEWS&adxnnlx=1162184838-XcjB6bEjFbF/F7nHe/YbVw

The battle of SanDisk and iPod

SanDisk attempts to steal market share from Apple with the creation of Sansa, an ipod-like invention with more added features, and a cheaper price tag.

http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=18057&hed=SanDisk+Takes+on+iPod

New software that simulates basic laboratory science experiments is now available for students to use.  Some say it’s a good replacement for real-life hands-on experiments because the simulated versions are cheaper and safer for students.  But is there any real replacement for the experience a lab environment can offer?  For students in poorer districts where the schools don’ t even have science labs, this might be the only way for underprivileged students to get the experience necessary to make them competitive applicants to college.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20810FC3D5B0C738EDDA90994DE404482


Wondering how to be an Extra-Festive Geek this Halloween?

Just follow the lead of the makers of this jack-o-lantern computer!  With exhaust fans for eyes, a disc-drive in the mouth, and “Intel Inside,” you’ll earn bragging rights this Halloween.  Heck, you may even make up for the pathetic ghost costume you end up sporting for the third year in a row...


http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/pcs/pumpkin-computer-just-like-mom-used-to-make-209299.php

Indemnity Protection to Open-Source Customers

Open-Logic is a company involved in the conflict between SCO and IBM for the misuse of Unix code in IBM’ s contribution to Linux.  Open-Logic expressed to customers who have downloaded the free software and paid for its support, that they need not fear law suits.  Instead, Open-Logic offers indemnity from intellectual property infringement lawsuits.


http://news.com.com/Open-source+firm+offers+to+protect+customers+from+lawsuits/2100-7344_3-6126797.html?tag=html.alert

Open-Source Graphics Driver has Security Flaw

Usually, open-source projects have fewer security risks.  With this flaw, a remote user could hack into the graphics driver and take over the system.  The driver manufacturer, Nvidia, is confident that a patch will be available shortly.


http://news.com.com/Exploit+code+released+for+Nvidia+flaw/2100-1002_3-6126846.html?tag=html.alert

Court says neutral party must examine hard drive in file-sharing case

In future file-sharing lawsuits initiated by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), examination of the defendant’s personal hard-drives must be done by independent third parties.  

http://news.com.com/A+bottom-up+approach+to+tech/2008-1014_3-6125940.html?tag=html.alert


Who’s next for Yahoo in the world of mergers?

Microsoft’s patent dispute with AT&T could determine the reach of U.S. patents overseas.  Microsoft had argued unsuccessfully before the appeals court that liability should not extend to products sold overseas because software is not a product "component" under U.S. patent law, and because copies of the software were made overseas, rather than in the United States.  


http://money.cnn.com/2006/10/28/magazines/fortune/yahoo.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2006102812


Shutterfly, the story of a Dot-com marathon...


Shutterfly, an online photo printing service finally crossed a finish line of sorts when it became one of just a few e-commerce companies to go public since the dot-com bust.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/technology/30shutterfly.html?ei=5099&en=25c7601dd523c716&ex=1162789200&adxnnl=1&partner=TOPIXNEWS&adxnnlx=1162184838-XcjB6bEjFbF/F7nHe/YbVw

The battle of SanDisk and iPod

SanDisk attempts to steal market share from Apple with the creation of Sansa, an ipod-like invention with more added features, and a cheaper price tag.

http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=18057&hed=SanDisk+Takes+on+iPod

New software that simulates basic laboratory science experiments is now available for students to use.  Some say it’s a good replacement for real-life hands-on experiments because the simulated versions are cheaper and safer for students.  But is there any real replacement for the experience a lab environment can offer?  For students in poorer districts where the schools don’ t even have science labs, this might be the only way for underprivileged students to get the experience necessary to make them competitive applicants to college.

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20810FC3D5B0C738EDDA90994DE404482


Wondering how to be an Extra-Festive Geek this Halloween?

Just follow the lead of the makers of this jack-o-lantern computer!  With exhaust fans for eyes, a disc-drive in the mouth, and “Intel Inside,” you’ll earn bragging rights this Halloween.  Heck, you may even make up for the pathetic ghost costume you end up sporting for the third year in a row...


http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/pcs/pumpkin-computer-just-like-mom-used-to-make-209299.php

Indemnity Protection to Open-Source Customers

Open-Logic is a company involved in the conflict between SCO and IBM for the misuse of Unix code in IBM’ s contribution to Linux.  Open-Logic expressed to customers who have downloaded the free software and paid for its support, that they need not fear law suits.  Instead, Open-Logic offers indemnity from intellectual property infringement lawsuits.


http://news.com.com/Open-source+firm+offers+to+protect+customers+from+lawsuits/2100-7344_3-6126797.html?tag=html.alert

Open-Source Graphics Driver has Security Flaw

Usually, open-source projects have fewer security risks.  With this flaw, a remote user could hack into the graphics driver and take over the system.  The driver manufacturer, Nvidia, is confident that a patch will be available shortly.


http://news.com.com/Exploit+code+released+for+Nvidia+flaw/2100-1002_3-6126846.html?tag=html.alert

Court says neutral party must examine hard drive in file-sharing case

In future file-sharing lawsuits initiated by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), examination of the defendant’s personal hard-drives must be done by independent third parties.  

http://news.com.com/A+bottom-up+approach+to+tech/2008-1014_3-6125940.html?tag=html.alert


Who’s next for Yahoo in the world of mergers?

Microsoft’s patent dispute with AT&T could determine the reach of U.S. patents overseas.  Microsoft had argued unsuccessfully before the appeals court that liability should not extend to products sold overseas because software is not a product "component" under U.S. patent law, and because copies of the software were made overseas, rather than in the United States.  


http://money.cnn.com/2006/10/28/magazines/fortune/yahoo.fortune/index.htm?postversion=2006102812


Shutterfly, the story of a Dot-com marathon...


Shutterfly, an online photo printing service finally crossed a finish line of sorts when it became one of just a few e-commerce companies to go public since the dot-com bust.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/technology/30shutterfly.html?ei=5099&en=25c7601dd523c716&ex=1162789200&adxnnl=1&partner=TOPIXNEWS&adxnnlx=1162184838-XcjB6bEjFbF/F7nHe/YbVw

The battle of SanDisk and iPod

SanDisk attempts to steal market share from Apple with the creation of Sansa, an ipod-like invention with more added features, and a cheaper price tag.

http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=18057&hed=SanDisk+Takes+on+iPod

Indemnity Protection to Open-Source Customers
Open-Logic is a company involved in the conflict between SCO and IBM for the misuse of Unix code in IBM’ s contribution to Linux.  Open-Logic expressed to customers who have downloaded the free software and paid for its support, that they need not fear law suits.  Instead, Open-Logic offers indemnity from intellectual property infringement lawsuits.

http://news.com.com/Open-source+firm+offers+to+protect+customers+from+lawsuits/2100-7344_3-6126797.html?tag=html.alert

Open-Source Graphics Driver has Security Flaw


Usually, open-source projects have fewer security risks.  With this flaw, a remote user could hack into the graphics driver and take over the system.  The driver manufacturer, Nvidia, is confident that a patch will be available shortly.


http://news.com.com/Exploit+code+released+for+Nvidia+flaw/2100-1002_3-6126846.html?tag=html.alert

Court says neutral party must examine hard drive in file-sharing case


In future file-sharing lawsuits initiated by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), examination of the defendant’s personal hard-drives must be done by independent third parties.  

http://news.com.com/A+bottom-up+approach+to+tech/2008-1014_3-6125940.html?tag=html.alert


The battle of SanDisk and iPod
SanDisk attempts to steal market share from Apple with the creation of Sansa, an ipod-like invention with more added features, and a cheaper price tag.

http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=18057&hed=SanDisk+Takes+on+iPod