Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #07169
To: alt-beam@egroups.com
From: michael.hirtle@ns.sympatico.ca (Michael Hirtle)
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 14:01:07 -0300
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: Micro Motors, Skitters, and BeetleBots (fwd)
Yes i agree, but if people slip up on the topic intened for the e-mail lists it's not all
that bad, maybe we could get some good robotic ideas about topics that are a little of
the lists topic, i have got a few good robot ideas because of the of topic discushion
about the "stupid mistakes" subject.
but over all your right this should mostly deal with robots and tec stuff
Mark Dalton wrote:
> Like we spoke about many months ago.
> Yes, I a pretty annoyed with e-mails about non-technical topics.
> This is not a Robotics or really a technical issue, this is purely
> patent law, copyright law, and international trademark law. If you
> have specific questions about the Laws, please consult the library
> and a lawyer or talk to the person that holds the patent, copyright
> and/or trademark.
>
> But it is true, there no problem with the patent, unless you are going to
> sell or market the technology.. As has been repeatedly explained, it is
> open for personal and research use.
>
> And all anyone needs to do is contact the owner of a copyright, patent, etc..
> to get permission.
>
> This is the same as it is for any patent, copyright, trademark. This
> is not that complicated.
>
> For the copyright or trademark, you do need to give credit where credit
> is due. And if you don't not know if you are infringing, then you go
> to your local lawyer or the author and ask.. (you don't ask a lot of
> people that do NOT know).
>
> Also, this e-mail list is specifically for technical ROBOTICS as was
> indicated when you signed up.
>
> Again, I reitterate, this e-mail list is for Technical robotics issues
> not for peoples legal statements. And again, this is not the goal of
> this e-mail list, feel free to start another list for talking about
> legal issues.
>
> I do not have the time to read lots of junk mail. And I actaully
> want to read the list if it is on _TECHNICAL_ Robotics, versus
> legal issues.
>
> Mark
>
> Forwarded message:
> > From owner-beam@sgiblab.sgi.com Sat Oct 30 08:44:51 1999
> > Message-ID: <381AEF78.630AA9B9@tiac.net>
> > Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 09:15:37 -0400
> > From: Bob Shannon
> > X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win98; U)
> > X-Accept-Language: en
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > To: beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
> > Subject: Re: Micro Motors, Skitters, and BeetleBots
> > References: <199910300256.VAA25654@ebony-e185.cray.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > Sender: owner-beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
> > Precedence: bulk
> > Reply-To: beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
> > Errors-To: owner-beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
> > X-Comment: Send unsubscribe requests to
> >
> >
> >
> > Mark Dalton wrote:
> >
> > > I do not censor ANYONEs postings.. Stop spreading false information.
> > >
> > > THe focus of the list is Robotics, not patents and legal issues,
> > > there are entire newsgroups that focus on these..
> > >
> > > As we have spoken about this MANY times before, this is not really
> > > a robotics or technical issue.
> > >
> > > Again, if you have moral character, you will not violate the patent
> > > or any copy rights. Any respectable person or company before selling
> > > anything will do the proper research, contact the appropriate people,
> > > and will do things legally.
> > >
> > > Mark
> >
> > Whoa there Mark,
> >
> > I think you have mistepped badly right here.
> >
> > If your have a moral and ethical character, you will not claim the intellectual
> > property of the many who came first.
> >
> > The discussion of BEAM patents often revolves around exactly this, and also
> > the still unanswered question of what (leagally) ~is~ beam in the first place.
> >
> > Discussion threads on this list have consistantly shown that there is not a proper
> > understanding of just what intellectual property rightfully belongs to whom, what
> > (if any) is in the public domain, or even what legal protection actually exists.
> >
> > Look at the Popular Electronic photovore article. The list was jumping up and down
> > about how Tilden should sue, but then we learn that Tilden did not originate the
> > 1381 based SE. We are building myths here.
> >
> > As far as calling what is, and what is not off topic, I think you might try to be a
> > bit more consistant in the future, in the interest of morals and honesty. Even if
> > this thread has been discussed before, there may be new opinions and ideas. I dont
> > think its appropriate to stomp the thread for this reason alone, after all, how
> > many times have we discussed some SE or other BEAM circuit over and over again?
> >
>
> --
> Mark Dalton CH3-S-CH2 H H O H
> Silicon Graphics, Inc. | | | \ |
> Eagan, MN 55121 CH2-C-COO //\ ---C--CH2-C-COO C-CH2-C-COO
> mwd@sgi.com | | || || | // |
> NH3 \\/ \ / CH NH3 O NH3
> NH
> My home page: http://www.cbc.umn.edu/~mwd/mwd.html
> Cell Biology: http://www.cbc.umn.edu/~mwd/cell.html
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Looking for the latest consumer electronic gadgets or computer
> equipment? eBay has thousands of audio equipment, computer
> games & accessories. You never know what you might find at eBay!
> http://clickhere.egroups.com/click/1142
>
> eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/alt-beam
> http://www.egroups.com
- Simplifying group communications
Home