| |
CX2SA > SATDIG 15.07.20 09:35l 705 Lines 29661 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : AMSATBB15256
Read: GUEST
Subj: AMSAT-BB-digest V15 256
Path: IW8PGT<IZ3LSV<DB0ERF<DB0RES<ON0AR<OZ5BBS<CX2SA
Sent: 200715/0733Z @:CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM #:34977 [Salto] FBB7.00e $:AMSATBB15256
From: CX2SA@CX2SA.SAL.URY.SOAM
To : SATDIG@WW
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Who I'm voting for (long) (Bruce Perens)
2. AMSAT IP (Scott McDonald)
3. Candidate for BOD (Howie DeFelice)
4. Re: AMSAT IP (Bruce Perens)
5. Re: Slack vs. eMail -- The medium is the message (Sterling Mann)
6. AO-92 Mode L/v postponed (Andrew Glasbrenner)
7. Re: AMSAT IP (Michelle Thompson)
8. Re: AMSAT IP (Scott McDonald)
9. Who I?m NOT Voting For (Short) (Clint Bradford)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 19:38:01 -0700
From: Bruce Perens <bruce@??????.???>
To: Robert Bankston <ke4al@?????.???>, Robert Bankston
<ke4al@?????.???>
Cc: AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Who I'm voting for (long)
Message-ID:
<CAK2MWOvEGF4x9qbEWpawXMN=CVo7m3oQoPKUXwL2P2gZ_2FfcA@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Robert,
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 4:58 PM Robert Bankston via AMSAT-BB <
amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> I know you only show up at election time
>
Snark if you want, but I am working on Amateur Space quite often. My latest
was the pocketqube ion thruster project, see
http://perens.com/static/AppliedIon/
where my work successfully raised the necessary funds and got the project
on its feet again.
AMSAT is on a solid financial footing and headed in the right direction.
Well, that is wonderful. But you must understand where my trepidation about
AMSAT's finances comes from, since AMSAT presidents in their annual reports
at AMSATs own meetings have been really grim about AMSAT's finances.
I also hear that around the start of April, you reported "Without cash
flows, we (AMSAT) can't afford to pay our bills." At which point AMSAT
applied for the government salary protection program. That is after the
report you just cited, isn't it? We are all suffering from COVID-19 related
austerity, and we can expect AMSAT to lose funds that it would have
received around conferences, etc., so best wishes with that.
Thanks
Bruce
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 03:15:38 +0000 (UTC)
From: Scott McDonald <ka9p@???.???>
To: "amsat-bb@?????.???? <amsat-bb@?????.???>,
"mountain.michelle@?????.???? <mountain.michelle@?????.???>
Cc: "amsat-bb@?????.???? <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: [amsat-bb] AMSAT IP
Message-ID: <1303525517.1298763.1594782938358@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Bruce-
As a member I have to take exception to most of?your note.
1) To oversimplify, non-standard original shapes much like the satellite
model?often are?considered copyrightable, and the copyright vests in the
creator when?the work is?created.?Notice and registration have much?to do
with the right to sue and collect damages, among other things, but have
nothing to do with the copyright vesting in the creator.
2) In my experience, it is?a rare organization that would be happy with a
director having an informal discussion with "enough" other directors and
then releasing its intellectual property.? And AMSAT should not be happy
with it.? It might be OK in an open source world, but it certainly is not
the norm elsewhere.? In this case it may have been fine, but it's hardly the
model of responsible intellectual property stewardship.
3) Your opinion that AMSAT shouldn't pursue patents dumbfounds me.? While
patents are often pursued where they shouldn't be, you can't make that naked
statement a priori. You must appreciate AMSAT is blessed with a wealth of
technical expertise and experience.? To suggest?AMSAT might not generate
valuable, protectable?inventions in the course of?its work totally fails to
recognize AMSAT's organizational capabilities.?
If?AMSAT creates something that is commercially significant in the satellite
field, protectable by any form of IP, that invention should not be disclosed
to others until an informed decision is made as to its potential value.? If
there is a good business case for protecting the asset, that should be
done.? I expect?there are enough members that could do this work pro
bono,?if the work could actually provide AMSAT with licensing income or
leverage for collaboration opportunities.
I expect many AMSAT volunteers already know this from their work elsewhere,
but figured it was worth mentioning, as its seems some folks may not.
Scott ka9p
From: Bruce Perens via AMSAT-BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
To: Michelle Thompson <mountain.michelle@?????.???>
Cc: AMSAT BB <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Sent: Tue, Jul 14, 2020 5:53 pm
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Who I'm voting for (long)
I am not entirely sure that it would have been copyrightable, in any case.
17 USC 102(b): In no case does copyright protection for an original work of
authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of
operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in
which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.
Such things are the domain of patent rather than copyright. And we can
discuss another time why AMSAT should not pursue patents.
Of course, most people stick a copyright declaration on things without ever
understanding that. Don't try to take it to court.
_______________________________________________
Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
expressed
are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 03:49:54 +0000
From: Howie DeFelice <howied231@???????.???>
To: "amsat-bb@?????.???? <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: [amsat-bb] Candidate for BOD
Message-ID:
<MN2PR14MB35179E88DC47CB61C3E91115E77E0@?????????????.????????.????.???????.??
?>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
My name is Howie DeFelice, callsign AB2S and I am currently a second
alternate director in AMSAT. I am running to seek a term as a full member of
the Board of Directors. I ran for the office of director last year because I
felt AMSAT needed some new blood with some new ideas. As an alternate
director I got to observe from the sidelines, at least as much as I could
since regular board meetings were suspended for the first time in the
organization's history. I?m afraid my worst fears were true and the
leadership of AMSAT really is a ?good ole boys club?. When new people
became part of the organization last year it went into hibernation mode.
This effectively froze any possible new ideas that were different from the
legacy members? long held beliefs. The only way forward for the organization
is to change the composition of the board of directors. I would like to
outline some of the small things that can be done that could have a positive
impact on the organization. More information is
available on my web site
www.ab2s.freeservers.com<http://www.ab2s.freeservers.com> .
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 20:51:21 -0700
From: Bruce Perens <bruce@??????.???>
To: Scott McDonald <ka9p@???.???>
Cc: "amsat-bb@?????.???? <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT IP
Message-ID:
<CAK2MWOuEs4HpRSHT2fDyiV8LQL6v6rDTPfE0+12Sc=ekQADV7A@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 8:18 PM Scott McDonald via AMSAT-BB <
amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> Bruce-
> As a member I have to take exception to most of your note.
> 1) To oversimplify, non-standard original shapes much like the satellite
> model often are considered copyrightable, and the copyright vests in the
> creator when the work is created. Notice and registration have much to do
> with the right to sue and collect damages, among other things, but have
> nothing to do with the copyright vesting in the creator.
>
Actually, I would think that the shapes are more the topic of design
patent. The case law around this applies to 2D fonts: the font file can be
copyrighted, but if one renders the font and traces the outline, that is
_not_ protected by copyright. The law has not entirely followed this for 3D
shapes, but in part that is because we don't have enough good cases about
them yet.
And then we have the matter of the *function* of the particular shape. The
overall cubesat shape is constrained by a standard and thus functional
rather than expressive and not copyright protectible. Something like a
parabolic antenna would be constrained by phyiscal law and thus again
functional rather than expressive and not copyright protectible.
Of course I'd love to write an expert report on this topic or help an
attorney argue all of this in court.
> 2) In my experience, it is a rare organization that would be happy with a
> director having an informal discussion with "enough" other directors and
> then releasing its intellectual property.
Is this about Michelle and the model? I am not going to argue that she
isn't headstrong, etc. It may be the kind of headstrong we need. There is
about 50 years of inertia to overcome.
> 3) Your opinion that AMSAT shouldn't pursue patents dumbfounds me.
Wow! No, I am going to stand by that one. First, AMSAT as a public benefit
non-profit should not be standing in the way of other people's research and
work. Second, if it does so, it will be subject to companies bringing their
patent portfolios to bear against AMSAT, which would entirely hobble
AMSAT's ability to build and launch satellites. Every software program and
I am sure everything as complex as a cubesat practices a patent claim that
is currently in force if never litigated. What we have right now is a sort
of tacit detante, which is the best we can do within current law. This is a
topic I have explored thoroughly for Open Source projects. Start to issue
patents to AMSAT, and we will be on the radar of very many companies with
larger portfolios than ours.
The only workable strategy would be a purely defensive portfolio, and I
can't see that it's worth the cost.
If AMSAT creates something that is commercially significant in the
> satellite field, protectable by any form of IP, that invention should not
> be disclosed to others until an informed decision is made as to its
> potential value. If there is a good business case for protecting the
> asset, that should be done. I expect there are enough members that could
> do this work pro bono, if the work could actually provide AMSAT with
> licensing income or leverage for collaboration opportunities.
>
The problem with all of this is that AMSAT has to bring lawsuits to enforce
its patents, and threaten to do so before anyone else would even consider
paying for a patent. A patent is simply a license to sue. Meanwhile, we
have to be 1000 times more careful to search patents about everything in
our satellites. No thank you.
I expect many AMSAT volunteers already know this from their work elsewhere,
> but figured it was worth mentioning, as its seems some folks may not.
I am sure that many people know something of the patent policy of their
companies. Most probably don't understand it fully. But that doesn't apply
to a public benefit non-profit, for sensible strategic reasons. This is one
of those areas where a corporate attorney could give us the entirely wrong
advice.
Thanks
Bruce
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 22:56:32 -0500
From: Sterling Mann <kawfey@?????.???>
To: "Joseph B. Fitzgerald" <jfitzgerald@????.???.???>
Cc: "amsat-bb@?????.???? <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Slack vs. eMail -- The medium is the message
Message-ID:
<CACxCfFpeUxzg3SuBuRzrh6cRgeT9tY-8paOxbPbb1ydV1q8-=Q@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
I would not be a fan if the email list was removed in lieu of chat. They
coexist well in many venues. Email is good for some things, chat is good
for other things.
I was going to suggest Discord too, but A.) it's already been suggested B.)
it's already been found at fault for something C.) I see that someone else
already started a Discord AMSAT server (
https://signal-lounge.com/2020/05/23/new-discord-server-for-amateur-satellite-
amsat/)
(although the link is invalid).
Also, this conversation sounds eerily familiar...oh yea:
https://www.amsat.org/pipermail/amsat-bb/2018-March/067425.html
73,
Sterling N0SSC
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 10:00 PM Joseph B. Fitzgerald via AMSAT-BB <
amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
> For those that would like to develop proposals for alternatives to
> amsat-bb, note that there are presently 2550 subscribers. Turning off the
> mailing lists does not avoid any marginal costs - running GNU Mailman
> consumes only a tiny fraction of a single server's resources.
>
> de KM1P Joe
> _______________________________________________
> Sent via AMSAT-BB@?????.???. AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available
> to all interested persons worldwide without requiring membership. Opinions
> expressed
> are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
> AMSAT-NA.
> Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
> Subscription settings: https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
>
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 23:57:27 -0400
From: "Andrew Glasbrenner" <glasbrenner@??????????.???>
To: "'AMSAT BB'" <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: [amsat-bb] AO-92 Mode L/v postponed
Message-ID: <01f701d65a5c$0e389a90$2aa9cfb0$@??????????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I placed AO-92 in Mode L/v this evening at 0302Z. I tested the L band uplink
and it was fine. About 6 minutes later and after I had quit listening, the
voltage on the satellite dipped below 3.6v and it went into auto safe mode
very briefly before exiting eclipse and rebounding. When entering auto safe
mode, the L converter is reset to off. So, despite the mode change we are
back into U/v. In a way this is good because auto safe mode is doing its job
protecting the batteries from over discharge.
Until I can work with the engineering team as to the best way forward, we'll
have to postpone L/v for now. Sorry, and I'll share more when I know it.
73, Drew KO4MA
AMSAT VP Operations
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 21:14:55 -0700
From: Michelle Thompson <mountain.michelle@?????.???>
To: Bruce Perens <bruce@??????.???>
Cc: "amsat-bb@?????.???? <amsat-bb@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT IP
Message-ID:
<CACvjz2UqDOHTnY+39s0x4+bRwouAFPgAMA5SU8tp60pCB40aJQ@????.?????.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Since we are talking about IP, let me turn your attention to some actual
problems with intellectual property management at AMSAT.
For example, an entire custom set of HDL cores, donated to AMSAT by
Comtech/AHA, was lost. The NDA was neglected and literally lost until I
brought it up. I insisted Joe Spier go find it for the 2019 annual meeting.
Worse, the license for the community accessible version with GNU Radio
simply not managed. That community totally lost out on something that was
supposed to come to them through this work.
This entire block of IP was simply squandered. Did someone end up with it
that should not have? Because it helps digital modes, was it just
gobblygook to engineering leadership?
If we can't manage this type of data, then how do you think we are doing
managing more important things with harsher repercussions?
Unlike files that describe a toy plastic model, this was advanced error
correcting and control code, designed for space applications, that actually
put us well ahead of many chip manufacturers at the time.
If you want this sort of waste to change, then please vote for Howie
DeFelice, Jeff Johns, and Robert McGwier.
Why? Because the incumbents blindly support the officers that lost this IP,
and will simply re-appoint all of those officers if they win.
AMSAT got this gift, primarily because of Robert McGwier. One of his
students spent the summer doing the work with AHA mentoring him.
Howie DeFelice works in the commercial satellite world and would simply
never let valuable IP walk out the door or fall on the floor.
Jeff Johns is a trained consultant in quality and accountability systems.
People like him annoy the tar out of me at work because I can't get away
with flushing IP down a toilet or giving it to my friends in violation of
an NDA.
Yes, I'm headstrong. But I'm not stupid. Problems like this are what we
should be caring about and voting on, instead of plastic toys.
-Michelle W5NYV
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 8:51 PM Bruce Perens <bruce@??????.???> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 8:18 PM Scott McDonald via AMSAT-BB <
> amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
>
>> Bruce-
>> As a member I have to take exception to most of your note.
>> 1) To oversimplify, non-standard original shapes much like the satellite
>> model often are considered copyrightable, and the copyright vests in the
>> creator when the work is created. Notice and registration have much to do
>> with the right to sue and collect damages, among other things, but have
>> nothing to do with the copyright vesting in the creator.
>>
>
> Actually, I would think that the shapes are more the topic of design
> patent. The case law around this applies to 2D fonts: the font file can be
> copyrighted, but if one renders the font and traces the outline, that is
> _not_ protected by copyright. The law has not entirely followed this for 3D
> shapes, but in part that is because we don't have enough good cases about
> them yet.
>
> And then we have the matter of the *function* of the particular shape.
> The overall cubesat shape is constrained by a standard and thus functional
> rather than expressive and not copyright protectible. Something like a
> parabolic antenna would be constrained by phyiscal law and thus again
> functional rather than expressive and not copyright protectible.
>
> Of course I'd love to write an expert report on this topic or help an
> attorney argue all of this in court.
>
>
>> 2) In my experience, it is a rare organization that would be happy with a
>> director having an informal discussion with "enough" other directors and
>> then releasing its intellectual property.
>
>
> Is this about Michelle and the model? I am not going to argue that she
> isn't headstrong, etc. It may be the kind of headstrong we need. There is
> about 50 years of inertia to overcome.
>
>
>> 3) Your opinion that AMSAT shouldn't pursue patents dumbfounds me.
>
>
> Wow! No, I am going to stand by that one. First, AMSAT as a public benefit
> non-profit should not be standing in the way of other people's research and
> work. Second, if it does so, it will be subject to companies bringing their
> patent portfolios to bear against AMSAT, which would entirely hobble
> AMSAT's ability to build and launch satellites. Every software program and
> I am sure everything as complex as a cubesat practices a patent claim that
> is currently in force if never litigated. What we have right now is a sort
> of tacit detante, which is the best we can do within current law. This is a
> topic I have explored thoroughly for Open Source projects. Start to issue
> patents to AMSAT, and we will be on the radar of very many companies with
> larger portfolios than ours.
>
> The only workable strategy would be a purely defensive portfolio, and I
> can't see that it's worth the cost.
>
> If AMSAT creates something that is commercially significant in the
>> satellite field, protectable by any form of IP, that invention should not
>> be disclosed to others until an informed decision is made as to its
>> potential value. If there is a good business case for protecting the
>> asset, that should be done. I expect there are enough members that could
>> do this work pro bono, if the work could actually provide AMSAT with
>> licensing income or leverage for collaboration opportunities.
>>
>
> The problem with all of this is that AMSAT has to bring lawsuits to
> enforce its patents, and threaten to do so before anyone else would even
> consider paying for a patent. A patent is simply a license to sue.
> Meanwhile, we have to be 1000 times more careful to search patents about
> everything in our satellites. No thank you.
>
> I expect many AMSAT volunteers already know this from their work
>> elsewhere, but figured it was worth mentioning, as its seems some folks may
>> not.
>
>
> I am sure that many people know something of the patent policy of their
> companies. Most probably don't understand it fully. But that doesn't apply
> to a public benefit non-profit, for sensible strategic reasons. This is one
> of those areas where a corporate attorney could give us the entirely wrong
> advice.
>
> Thanks
>
> Bruce
>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:05:58 -0500
From: Scott McDonald <ka9p@???.???>
To: Michelle Thompson <mountain.michelle@?????.???>
Cc: Amsat BB <AMSAT-BB@?????.???>
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] AMSAT IP
Message-ID: <47B62B71-B480-4ED1-A9DD-676F797F3D55@???.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Michelle, I understand your points.
But the solution in real life is rarely to toss out the existing team. You
might get a manager fired, but the team is too valuable.
If you see something, say something. So far so good. But then identify and
explain the risk, get buy-in and proactively do something to get everyone
trained to respect and manage the issue.
In my experience re-elected board members tend to find a way to make good
things happen, even against the odds.
Scott Ka9p
Sent from my iPad
> On Jul 14, 2020, at 11:15 PM, Michelle Thompson
<mountain.michelle@?????.???> wrote:
>
> ?
> Since we are talking about IP, let me turn your attention to some actual
problems with intellectual property management at AMSAT.
>
> For example, an entire custom set of HDL cores, donated to AMSAT by
Comtech/AHA, was lost. The NDA was neglected and literally lost until I
brought it up. I insisted Joe Spier go find it for the 2019 annual meeting.
>
> Worse, the license for the community accessible version with GNU Radio
simply not managed. That community totally lost out on something that was
supposed to come to them through this work.
>
> This entire block of IP was simply squandered. Did someone end up with it
that should not have? Because it helps digital modes, was it just gobblygook
to engineering leadership?
>
> If we can't manage this type of data, then how do you think we are doing
managing more important things with harsher repercussions?
>
> Unlike files that describe a toy plastic model, this was advanced error
correcting and control code, designed for space applications, that actually
put us well ahead of many chip manufacturers at the time.
>
> If you want this sort of waste to change, then please vote for Howie
DeFelice, Jeff Johns, and Robert McGwier.
>
> Why? Because the incumbents blindly support the officers that lost this
IP, and will simply re-appoint all of those officers if they win.
>
> AMSAT got this gift, primarily because of Robert McGwier. One of his
students spent the summer doing the work with AHA mentoring him.
>
> Howie DeFelice works in the commercial satellite world and would simply
never let valuable IP walk out the door or fall on the floor.
>
> Jeff Johns is a trained consultant in quality and accountability systems.
People like him annoy the tar out of me at work because I can't get away
with flushing IP down a toilet or giving it to my friends in violation of an
NDA.
>
> Yes, I'm headstrong. But I'm not stupid. Problems like this are what we
should be caring about and voting on, instead of plastic toys.
>
> -Michelle W5NYV
>
>
>
>
>> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 8:51 PM Bruce Perens <bruce@??????.???> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 8:18 PM Scott McDonald via AMSAT-BB
<amsat-bb@?????.???> wrote:
>>
>>> Bruce-
>>> As a member I have to take exception to most of your note.
>>> 1) To oversimplify, non-standard original shapes much like the satellite
model often are considered copyrightable, and the copyright vests in the
creator when the work is created. Notice and registration have much to do
with the right to sue and collect damages, among other things, but have
nothing to do with the copyright vesting in the creator.
>>
>> Actually, I would think that the shapes are more the topic of design
patent. The case law around this applies to 2D fonts: the font file can be
copyrighted, but if one renders the font and traces the outline, that is
_not_ protected by copyright. The law has not entirely followed this for 3D
shapes, but in part that is because we don't have enough good cases about
them yet.
>>
>> And then we have the matter of the function of the particular shape. The
overall cubesat shape is constrained by a standard and thus functional
rather than expressive and not copyright protectible. Something like a
parabolic antenna would be constrained by phyiscal law and thus again
functional rather than expressive and not copyright protectible.
>>
>> Of course I'd love to write an expert report on this topic or help an
attorney argue all of this in court.
>>
>>> 2) In my experience, it is a rare organization that would be happy with
a director having an informal discussion with "enough" other directors and
then releasing its intellectual property.
>>
>> Is this about Michelle and the model? I am not going to argue that she
isn't headstrong, etc. It may be the kind of headstrong we need. There is
about 50 years of inertia to overcome.
>>
>>> 3) Your opinion that AMSAT shouldn't pursue patents dumbfounds me.
>>
>> Wow! No, I am going to stand by that one. First, AMSAT as a public
benefit non-profit should not be standing in the way of other people's
research and work. Second, if it does so, it will be subject to companies
bringing their patent portfolios to bear against AMSAT, which would entirely
hobble AMSAT's ability to build and launch satellites. Every software
program and I am sure everything as complex as a cubesat practices a patent
claim that is currently in force if never litigated. What we have right now
is a sort of tacit detante, which is the best we can do within current law.
This is a topic I have explored thoroughly for Open Source projects. Start
to issue patents to AMSAT, and we will be on the radar of very many
companies with larger portfolios than ours.
>>
>> The only workable strategy would be a purely defensive portfolio, and I
can't see that it's worth the cost.
>>
>>> If AMSAT creates something that is commercially significant in the
satellite field, protectable by any form of IP, that invention should not be
disclosed to others until an informed decision is made as to its potential
value. If there is a good business case for protecting the asset, that
should be done. I expect there are enough members that could do this work
pro bono, if the work could actually provide AMSAT with licensing income or
leverage for collaboration opportunities.
>>
>> The problem with all of this is that AMSAT has to bring lawsuits to
enforce its patents, and threaten to do so before anyone else would even
consider paying for a patent. A patent is simply a license to sue.
Meanwhile, we have to be 1000 times more careful to search patents about
everything in our satellites. No thank you.
>>
>>> I expect many AMSAT volunteers already know this from their work
elsewhere, but figured it was worth mentioning, as its seems some folks may
not.
>>
>> I am sure that many people know something of the patent policy of their
companies. Most probably don't understand it fully. But that doesn't apply
to a public benefit non-profit, for sensible strategic reasons. This is one
of those areas where a corporate attorney could give us the entirely wrong
advice.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Bruce
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 00:27:00 -0700
From: Clint Bradford <clintbradford@???.???>
To: amsat-bb@?????.???
Subject: [amsat-bb] Who I?m NOT Voting For (Short)
Message-ID: <351DD49D-DF83-4E60-ABE5-0F8914F1666A@???.???>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Patrick and Jeff created a Web site In 2018 using my Web site?s name - but
added the plural of my work-sat.com - they used ?Sats.?
The site was solely created to demean myself and Gordon West. The posts were
obscene, vile, insulting, and vicious in their attacks. Most of their posts
are too objectionable to post on a public forum like this: posts like two
rats fornicating and writing that my satellite inquiry phone number of
800-999-SATS could also use the alpha characters, 800-999-RATS.
If anyone is interested in reading screenshots of their work, I will
privately email them to you.
Stoddard and Johns will not be receiving my vote.
Clint Bradford K6LCS
909-999-SATS
PS They let the GoDaddy domain name expire after a year. I registered it
immediately - and it is now redirected to my site.
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Sent via amsat-bb@?????.???.
AMSAT-NA makes this open forum available to all interested persons worldwide
without requiring membership. Opinions expressed
are solely those of the author, and do not reflect the official views of
AMSAT-NA.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
https://www.amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
------------------------------
End of AMSAT-BB Digest, Vol 15, Issue 256
*****************************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
