32 thoughts on “Chisum Patent Academy

  1. 32

    To be sure, I didn’t really mean to “attack you” but in all seriousness NWPA, your take on this puff piece by anonymous are lolable.

    And of course I identify with them strongly I am both 1. a member of the public that is constantly at the mercy of these overreaching ja ckoffs in the DOJ (and other lawl enforcement I might add) just as you are. and
    2. I’m also an anonymous myself. Though my “hacking” days are far behind me. I certainly did have fun though 🙂 All the stuff I did was small time goofing off though really and over half of what I did was at the behest of the school officials themselves. I do think though that at least one authority figure had their suspicions about me though, as a policeman did at one point for some reason point out specifically to me exactly what overreaching nonsensical lawls there were on the books at school one day. I’m sorry but kids goofing off on computer systems in ways that aren’t harming anyone simply shouldn’t be a federal crime much less a felony. Or for that matter someone using authorized access to download articles. I see this even more clearly now as an adult than I did see it back then.

  2. 31

    You sound like you identify with them very strongly 6.

    Gee, if we subtract the personal attacks there isn’t much content to that post.

  3. 30

    First I can assure you that you are mistaken about there being some sort of “conspiracy theory”ish “connection” between north korea wanting to nuke us and in anonymous using the nuclear missle analogy. They are americans ta rd, they don’t want to be blown up any more than the rest of us and they sure as f do not want N korea getting nuke plans any more than the rest of us, regardless of them wanting sentencing guidelines etc fixed.

    I cannot believe that, even though you are old, and probably still scared of commies with nukes, you would let anon aka AI, out reading comprehension you.

    Let’s be clear, they are threatening the release of embarrassing (and possibly damaging) infoz about the gov, not weapons plans, and certainly not actual nukes. The group anon is always using “nukes” “orbital ion cannons” etc. as part of their rhetoric to describe the effects of releasing information.

    In any event, once you get your old man pant ies out of a kno t thinking about real life nukes, perhaps you will reconsider their plans.

    Although you seem to feel like they should work “within the system” to change things like sentencing guidelines. 1. They probably don’t know how / are not capable of doing so because they are excluded from your gentleman’s club of the bar. 2. The people that have been doing so and who are best at this have been failing. and 3. It is a lot more fun this way. oh and 4. Just like you said, it takes someone like a supreme court justice, or a person of that magnitude of accomplishment to even have a chance at getting these things done “within” the system. As nnon noted above, working “within” a broken system, which is broken for a reason(s) (see prison industrial complex making $$$) is not the way to do it all the time.

    Also, pay attention to whom they have hacked as of now, they did not hack the DOD or the pentagon, or any other places where you might find nuke plans. Although, yes, I’m sure they could. But you can put your ta rd brain at ease, they neither want N korea to have nuke plans or want themselves to be nuked.

  4. 29

    Yes I understand their goals as is clear from my earlier posts.

    Your comments seem strange to me anon. I suggest you rethink your posts and review the current state of the threat of the use of nuclear weapons against us as well as the history of leaks form inside the U.S. government and how those leasks have helped others develop nuclear weapons.

  5. 28

    Simple: the actual content of their message and their stated goals.

    Do you understand their goals?

    Your exuberance is unwarranted.

  6. 27

    I would add to: secrets regarding nuclear bombs are kept by the U.S. government which anonymous is showing us they can get secrets from the U.S. government.

    How, anon, can you possible imagine that the video is not a terrorist video threatening the use of nuclear weapons?

  7. 26

    Anon, I did read the link I provided and watched the video. I don’t think anyone who watches the video or reads the text would think that there is not a clear threat of great violence.

    Additionally, consider: we all know the N. Koreans are threatening us with nuclear weapons; we all know what the N. Koreans need is know how to build the weapons. The connection is clear. Third world countries need information to carry out their threats of using nuclear weapons against us. I felt the threat palpable in that video. That was a terrorist video.

    The connection is very clear. That video is a threat of the use of nuclear bombs.

  8. 25


    You obviously did not read the very link you provided. The “nuke” reference was an analogy only.

    Please return the piece of blue sky to its place as you exit the circle.

  9. 24

    Taking over a government site and putting up a video with threats of starting a nuclear war make them terrorist, Anon.

    Had they taken over a government site and not invoked mass destruction but rather humiliation of government officials, then you might have a point.

  10. 23

    Of course you could still get (some) innovation. The question remains however: who will earn from the innovations/inventions made, the tiny upstart company or the existing industrial behemot?

  11. 22

    Terrorist might be a bit strong. If the system is broken, working within the system might be a lost cause.

    I am not advocating lawlessness, but I would point out that the birth of our nation was not an example of “working within the system,” and not every incident of working outside of the system is worthy of such severe condemnation.

  12. 21

    I don’t think their tactics are OK, 6. But, I do agree the federal justice system has become one where the penalties are severe, the cost is outrageous, and the leverage a federal prosecutor has over a defendant is far too great.

    But, they should be making these arguments legally and trying to work within the system to improve it. Like SC Justice Sandra Day O’Connor who is working to help improve state judges. She correctly has determined that the corruption is rampant. And she is trying to change it from an election to appointment system. She is a great hero of the criminal justice system. They are terrorist.

  13. 20

    I should note that in this situation you should be glad they’re doing this, you are not one of the people that in some major way benefits from the nonsense going on in our “criminal justice system”. It is much more likely that you’d be one of the 1% of people that gets fed by it than you will be one of the ones that benefits from it.

    Indeed, pretty much everyone should.

    It is true the steps they’re taking are drastic, but on the whole, our dysfunctional government could use a quick kick in its ar se to do something to fix the areas in which it is blatantly broken. It has been dragging its feet on this for decades while issues like abortionlol decide the elections, that are controlled by big parties with no reason to put forth candidates that would fix things.

    In any event, the interwebs always win in the end. The federal government may as well learn that now if they didn’t already learn with SOPA.

  14. 19

    You’re dar n skippy they’re scary. Although they are also very benign. Mostly they’re just up to pranks. But their power is probably already roughly that of a small country, and they are much more free to act than a small country.

    In any event, if you consider some leaked mud on the face of the government all that big of a deal, I say meh, just wait until they decide to do something malicious.

  15. 18

    And while you locate these societies that have embraced your naked idealism, get me a free beer from your free market.

  16. 17

    for lazy companies and other parasitic rent-seekers

    Another clueless ideologue. You really should try to understand the legal domain you wade into. Protecting those that innovate is the opposite of lazy and parasitic.

    Hey, perhaps you can help your fellow drive by crrpsters and identify a modern advanced society that has “seen the light” – you want to give it a try?

  17. 16

    Welfare is government or state support or subsidization. There is left-wing welfare and right-wing welfare. Food stamps are one form of left-wing welfare. IP laws are just a form of right-wing welfare (ever heard of “corporate” welfare?) for lazy companies and other parasitic rent-seekers (e.g., patent trolls) that cannot compete in a free market.

  18. 15

    You have a very good point.

    I know they will come after it with causation vs. correlation.

    I think the biggest lie about the anti-patent crowd is that they don’t seem to acknowledge the enormous pressure every company is in to innovate or lose their products to improvements.

    I think to understand this you have to go back to the Carter era and see how it changed when Reagon figured this out.

  19. 14

    B-b-b-but cause and correlation…

    (still waiting for the drive-by crrpsters to give that one single solitary example (how hard can it be to give one?) of a modern advanced society that has “seen the light”)

  20. 13

    Moreover, the countries with the most advanced patent systems are the same countries with the most advanced technology.

  21. 12

    like welfare

    The ignorance in this statement is profound.

    Perhaps another person who would love to provide an example of a modern advanced society that has “seen the light” and abdicated all IP laws…

    Why has no one – and I mean no one – been able to give such an example? The whole world must not be seeking this type of truth.

  22. 11

    Patents are a form of government assistance, like welfare. If you have a great, innovative product, why would you need help from government? People should want to freely buy your product without any government help or coercion. You can get innovation without patent monopolies. It’s unfortunate that people believe in the patent myth and delusion.

  23. 9

    I hope you realize that I do not view the vid links presented.

    And you would be far better off using that time you spend looking at vids with studying the law and pertinent case facts.

  24. 6

    According to many of the SCOTUS there is no structure in a computer readable medium so there can’t be anything there.

  25. 1

    Dennis, I think participating in your forum here is equivalent to an advanced patent law course. I must thank you for providing this blog for all of us to discuss current patent law issues. I, for one, am extremely grateful.

Comments are closed.