[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: "My dad is a pirate." but "Mark Kent is a clueless moron."

From: macca
Subject: Re: "My dad is a pirate." but "Mark Kent is a clueless moron."
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 19:20:44 GMT

This seems to be an on-going thing with dads playing pirates. Please read 
back dated posts to find out the answers tae life.

Just shows you that some dads need to watch wee Jimmy looking over his 
shoulder and seeing the Morphus web site eeewwwwwww.

Im lucky ive got daughters and they just think im porn mad !

"Troy Kirkland" <> wrote in message 
> Title fixed accordingly.
> "Troy Kirkland" <> wrote in message news:...
>> "Hadron" <> wrote in message 
>> news:fpuq25$c23$
>>> Mark Kent <> writes:
>>>>> The same should go for patents.
>>>> The first thing to consider is whether patent should ever be 
>>>> transferrable
>>>> from the original inventor.  To my mind, if a company employs someone
>>>> who invents something, that invention should remain the property of
>>>> that person, and the company should license it from them, similarly, it
>>>> should not be possible to sell on patents to patent trolling companies
>>>> like Acacia, or anyone else, for that matter.
>>>> It's about time that ownership of such things was returned to the real
>>>> inventors...
>>> If ever there was a time that Mark Kent revealed himself to be a troll
>>> it is now.
>>> Listen to what he is saying : a company who employs someone is not
>>> entitled to the things that that employee is paid to work on. He is
>>> is a troll or absolutely making it with a tele-tubbie.
>> Absolutely amazing. Just when I thought that nobody could be more 
>> clueless than Schestowitz or "Mark S. Bilk" this Kent troll comes along 
>> with this hillarious suggestion.
>> Aside from the blatant stupidity... it simply makes zero sense at all. 
>> Take for example some research being done at IBM. The researcher is being 
>> paid a salary by IBM. The company (IBM) is also the one funding the 
>> research and "assuming the risk" because it's completely likely that the 
>> research might not pan out in the end. Depending on the research being 
>> done, the cost of the facilities and equipment could easily run $10's of 
>> millions of dollars which is yet another investment that IBM is making.
>> According to the Kent idiot... if something is discovered or invented 
>> from all of this then IBM who paid the salary and put up all of the 
>> investment and took all of the risk, they would be nothing! The 
>> researcher would get to keep everything and simply walk out the door.
>> This is just absurd! No wonder that Mark Kent is an unemployed janitor. 
>> What a sort of idiot would even suggest something so stupid.
>>> FWIW, I do agree with stopping the selling of patents to a degree. Use
>>> it or lose it in other words.
>> Couldn't this be gotten around by granting an exclusive "license" to the 
>> patent which would effectively be the same thing. And companies do 
>> license patents all the time which is completely valid as far as I'm 
>> concerned.
> -- 
> Posted via a free Usenet account from

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]