Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: krw on 4 Nov 2006 22:58 In article <RZ93h.4899$B31.3455(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net says... > > "krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote in message > news:MPG.1fb6811853307b0989a87(a)news.individual.net... > > In article <zRz2h.4036$B31.709(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, > > lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net says... > >> > >> "JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message > >> news:iualk291t97f8404q1sh653htevg49g4s6(a)4ax.com... > >> > On 2 Nov 2006 18:23:32 -0800, "MooseFET" <kensmith(a)rahul.net> Gave us: > >> > > >> >>He is right. The new drug can't be the exact same chemical as the old > >> >>one... > >> > > >> > Bullshit. Patents get RENEWED BEFORE they expire. > >> > >> Where did you get *that* silly idea??? You might just want to go back to > >> insults--at least you understand those. > >> > > Actually, he's right (patents do need to be renewed) but this fact > > is irrelevant to the discussion. > > Once a patent reaches an age of 17 years (in the US; 20 in the rest of the > world), it expires. Period. Nope. Perhaps you want to learn something. Patents in the US are for a *MAXIMUM* of 20 years from the date of filing, but have to be renewed or abandoned several times within that 20 year period (every five years, IIRC). They *must* be renewed to last the 20 years. > Nothing you do can extend that. Are you > talking about renewing your maintenance fees? Sure. You pay up or the patent is abandoned. Isnt' this a "renewal"? > That is not renewing the patent, and as you say, irrelevant. The sense in > which he was talking about "renewing" sounded like a conflation with the > system of copyrights and trademarks, which are indeed indefinitely > renewable. ....only when congress extends it. -- Keith
From: krw on 4 Nov 2006 23:03 In article <Fea3h.4927$B31.4835(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net says... > > "krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote in message > news:MPG.1fb683e1f860803a989a88(a)news.individual.net... > > In article <eifrsp$irb$3(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, lparker(a)emory.edu > > says... > >> In article <eifgj0$8qk_005(a)s820.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, > >> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> >In article <ZDn2h.3658$B31.603(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, > >> > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > <big snip> > > > >> >>Nothing about income there. > >> > > >> >Pay attention to the if clause. There is paragraph that says > >> >if you don't have records, you can opt to pay your out > >> >of state purchases sales tax as a percentage of your income. > >> > > >> > >> Sure, and for the IRS, you can estimate your sales tax deduction as a > >> percentage of your income too. Nothing new there. > > > > IRS? "Sales tax deduction"? What drugs are you on? > > > None. I've done it the last few years. You have to itemize in order to > take advantage of it, though. You have no income tax? Try it next year. -- Keith
From: krw on 4 Nov 2006 23:05 In article <sfa3h.4932$B31.2443(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net says... > > "krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote in message > news:MPG.1fb684b3fd4ca419989a89(a)news.individual.net... > > In article <GRH2h.485$Mw.139(a)newssvr11.news.prodigy.com>, > > lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net says... > >> > >> <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message > >> news:eifcgg$8qk_001(a)s820.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com... > >> > > >> > Yes, Medicare and Medicaid in the US. If these two programs which > >> > are single payer don't work, why would making them be the only > >> > insurance payer in the country work? For that matter, why should > >> > we allow medical insurance payouts be a federal responsibility? That > >> > is undermining our Constitution by transferring power to the federal > >> > government rather than keeping it in each State. > >> > >> What part of "provide for the general welfare" do you not understand? > > > > Perhaps you want to read what the founding fathers thought it > > meant. Hint: I has nothing to do with what we call "welfare". > > Yes, I know that. Its original meaning was the health of the people of the > nation. Bullshit. -- Keith
From: lucasea on 4 Nov 2006 23:40 "krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote in message news:MPG.1fb72b7115bb9813989a96(a)news.individual.net... > In article <RZ93h.4899$B31.3455(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, > lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net says... >> >> "krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote in message >> news:MPG.1fb6811853307b0989a87(a)news.individual.net... >> > In article <zRz2h.4036$B31.709(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, >> > lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net says... >> >> >> >> "JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message >> >> news:iualk291t97f8404q1sh653htevg49g4s6(a)4ax.com... >> >> > On 2 Nov 2006 18:23:32 -0800, "MooseFET" <kensmith(a)rahul.net> Gave >> >> > us: >> >> > >> >> >>He is right. The new drug can't be the exact same chemical as the >> >> >>old >> >> >>one... >> >> > >> >> > Bullshit. Patents get RENEWED BEFORE they expire. >> >> >> >> Where did you get *that* silly idea??? You might just want to go back >> >> to >> >> insults--at least you understand those. >> >> >> > Actually, he's right (patents do need to be renewed) but this fact >> > is irrelevant to the discussion. >> >> Once a patent reaches an age of 17 years (in the US; 20 in the rest of >> the >> world), it expires. Period. > > Nope. Perhaps you want to learn something. I've been working in the chemical industry for 15 years, and have written several patents, a couple of which have subsequently abandoned because the company chose not to pursue the technology. I know how they work, thank you. > Patents in the US are > for a *MAXIMUM* of 20 years from the date of filing, No. In the US, they are valid for 17 years from the date the PTO grants them. I believe the rest of the world is first-to-file, and has 20 year terms. About 10 years ago, the PTO talked about aligning US patent law with the rest of the world, but they never did. In any case, that's not inconsistent with what I said. > but have to be > renewed or abandoned several times within that 20 year period > (every five years, IIRC). They *must* be renewed to last the 20 > years. > >> Nothing you do can extend that. Are you >> talking about renewing your maintenance fees? > > Sure. You pay up or the patent is abandoned. Isnt' this a > "renewal"? Not especially, but I accept that it could be viewed that way. Most people that I've worked with (including our patent attorneys) didn't speak of that as "renewing the patent", but simply as "paying the maintenance fees". In any case, that wasn't what JoeBloe appeared to be implying.... >> That is not renewing the patent, and as you say, irrelevant. The sense >> in >> which he was talking about "renewing" sounded like a conflation with the >> system of copyrights and trademarks, which are indeed indefinitely >> renewable. > > ...only when congress extends it. No, it's the purview of the PTO. Congress doesn't have time to worry about each of the hundreds of thousands of current copyrights and trademarks. Eric Lucas
From: lucasea on 4 Nov 2006 23:42
"krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote in message news:MPG.1fb72c9273625a39989a97(a)news.individual.net... > In article <Fea3h.4927$B31.4835(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, > lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net says... >> >> "krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote in message >> news:MPG.1fb683e1f860803a989a88(a)news.individual.net... >> > In article <eifrsp$irb$3(a)leto.cc.emory.edu>, lparker(a)emory.edu >> > says... >> >> In article <eifgj0$8qk_005(a)s820.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >> >> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> >In article <ZDn2h.3658$B31.603(a)newssvr27.news.prodigy.net>, >> >> > <lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >> > >> > <big snip> >> > >> >> >>Nothing about income there. >> >> > >> >> >Pay attention to the if clause. There is paragraph that says >> >> >if you don't have records, you can opt to pay your out >> >> >of state purchases sales tax as a percentage of your income. >> >> > >> >> >> >> Sure, and for the IRS, you can estimate your sales tax deduction as a >> >> percentage of your income too. Nothing new there. >> > >> > IRS? "Sales tax deduction"? What drugs are you on? >> >> >> None. I've done it the last few years. You have to itemize in order to >> take advantage of it, though. > > You have no income tax? Try it next year. What? Where did I say I have no income tax? Eric Lucas |