http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy hourly 1 1901-01-01T00:00+00:00 http://gmane.org/img/gmane-25t.png http://gmane.org http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/632 <pre> [...] Yep. Great flick. A real eye opener. Nope, but as you should recall that very subject WAS covered in Sicko. Will not comment further on anything anyone else has written as: a) I've already said my piece, and b) this isn't the proper forum for such "hot topic" discussions. My apologies to all for my off-topic venting. </pre> "Fish" (David B. Trout 2012-05-10T05:15:29 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/631 <pre> Give it a rest, guys. This is supposed to be a forum for Hercules advocacy. Regards, Roger Bowler Hercules "the people's mainframe" </pre> Roger Bowler 2012-05-09T13:08:35 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/630 <pre>Hi guys - I have been reading your mails and wondering. I think I saw in a movies last year somebody say. "Every good Housewife knows that at the end of the month - the first ceck you write is to the bank for the mortgage and the second is to the Insurance co," I am over 70 and do a ot of travelling all over the world. Put those together and you know that I see a lot of docors - all over. You may be paying the most in the world for your medical care in the states, but from my experience you are usually getting what you pay for. The experience you outline seems to be normal except for the bill. We lived in in the US for 12 years until 2008 - Our insurance cost us (wife an myself) more or less the same $14000 you were billed. Per year. But I had two operations (one serious) vroke a leg - had a stent put him - we both had colonsocopies twice and visited various doctors at least twice maybe tree times a month a month, Eye - GP - cardialogist - An several specalists for chronic conditions.immunilogy rheumitlogy related. Even had Hernia Looking back on that period, we think we got the best possibe care and attention. And we can pretty well compare that to other places in the world. So - Of course thats our experience only, but all in all we were very happy with the value received for Medical care in the US. We lived in Ct - Maybe that’s a factor. I think that getting the rght insurance up front is the trick. It's not cheap - but we were covered from head to toe from the day we arrived until the day we left. And out of pocket expenses were really very minimal. Roc . -----Original Message----- From: hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org [mailto:hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of "Fish" (David B. Trout) Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 10:37 PM To: Hercules-Advocacy Subject: [hercules-advocacy] RE: [hercules-390] Re: RESOLVED: HDL: no dependency section in hdt3420; devtype 3420 not recognized somitcw wrote: [...] I never said that nor implied it. I was simply lamenting the total cost of a few visits to the hospital. My wife caught pneumonia on New Year's day a year ago. Called a taxi and told them to take us to the hospital. (We haven't owned a car in over 15 years and so rely on public transportation.) They took us to the "wrong" hospital. They took us to one we had never been to before, but a hospital is a hospital, right? She was in a room for a grand total of ABOUT 6 hours. In that 6 hours they gave her some IV solution. They gave her some inhalation therapy. They took an x-ray. They reviewed the x-ray, talked to her for 15 minutes, prescribed some medication and sent us home. Four days later she was still feeling badly, so we called our "normal" hospital (the one we usually go to). They said to bring her in immediately. We did so. THEY went through the exact same procedure: IV, inhalation therapy, x-ray, 15 minutes with the doctor, here's your prescription now get out of here. Time spent: about 6 hours again. My visits were for sciatica. They left me in a room for a hour or two, gave me some meds (opiates; I was in extreme pain), did a leg lift examination, prescribed different meds, sent me home. About three weeks later I went through the same procedure again (the meds only lasted less than a week and then the pain came back (heh! no pun intended) IN FORCE. Worse than before. That's why I went back.), but this time demanded an x-ray or MRI or whatever, to determine what the underlying CAUSE was so we could treat THAT instead of simply treating the fucking SYMPTOMS like they were. Had an MRI done under sedation (general anesthesia). Grand total so far (that we KNOW of; they keep sending bills from many different places. From different departments in the hospital, from different doctor groups, medical groups, etc. We got bills from over a dozen different places!) was almost $14,000. (The actual total is probably much more than that but that was the total at the time we filed for bankruptcy). $14,000+ for what? 6 hours in a room, twice. 2-3 hours in a room, twice, 2 x-rays. Some medication. A grand total of about 30 minutes attention from the nursing staff. A grand total of about 20-30 minutes talking to a doctor. Is that fair? In my opinion it is not. The only reason they're charging so much is they can get away with it. And my "they" I mean the entire medical industry. The drug manufacturers. The insurance companies. (You wouldn't believe what they charge a doctor for malpractice insurance these days!) The hospitals. The MRI machine and x-ray machine manufacturers. The manufacturers of plastic tubing and plastic hoses. The manufacturers of hospital beds. Oxygen supply companies. Food service. Etc, etc, etc... It's like the military that gets charged $600 for a toilet seat. It's nuts. It's pure capitalism at its worse. They know they've got us by the balls. When we're sick or in pain or our very life is threatened, they can charge whatever outrageous price they want because they know we'll pay it. We can't "shop around" when it's an emergency. For routine doctor visits, yeah, we can shop around. But most of them are working for the insurance industry. "Medical insurance" Think about what that means! Insurance is a business wherein you pay money without ever expecting to get it back. No one expects to have an accident or plans to have one or eventually WANTS to have one. The only thing they EXPECT is that, god forbid, if/when they DO happen to need medical attention, that it's paid for. That's why they're paying their premium! But insurance companies HATE paying claims, because paying claims is a "loss". They lose money when they pay claims, so they go to great lengths to purposely AVOID having to pay claims, so they can make the maximum profit possible. A profit at the "expense" of the very people they "claim" they are trying to help! It's nuts! Their incentive is to *deny* claims. Their incentive is to *deny* medical attention. Their incentive is BACKWARDS! Why? Because they're an INSURANCE business. Before medical practice got fucked things up with "managed health care" (i.e. the medical insurance scam), there were just doctors. People with medical skills that hung a shingle out and offered people their services for a reasonable fee. Many of them came to your house with their little black bag when you called them. When was the last time you saw that? In those days if you didn't like the SERVICE your doctor was giving you, you went to a different one. He lost business, the other one gained. The incentive was to provide the best service possible for the best price! If you didn't provide good service or if your prices were too high, you didn't make money (or as much) due to lack of customers. Thus the incentive BEFORE the insurance industry fucked things up, was to PROVIDE medical care, not to deny it like today! Today's bullshit system makes me sick to my stomach. Why can't people just do the right thing instead of whatever they can get away with to make a buck? Call me an idealist. I firmly believe that if one does the right the money will eventually come. But unfortunately the bad guys (i.e. capitalists with no morals) prefer to short-circuit the system and screw over anyone and everyone they can get away with in order to make some short term fast money, so they can skip town and repeat the whole thing all over again. It's sickening. Literally. -- "Fish" (David B. Trout) fish-VLFb7ALKWJGGw+nKnLezzg&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links </pre> Rocky 2012-05-09T10:45:51 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/629 <pre>--- In hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org, Mike Schwab &lt;Mike.A.Schwab&lt; at &gt;...&gt; wrote: On the main group, I didn't want to mention that we pay double what many high price countries pay and have the worst infant mortality of any industrial country on the planet. We rank about number 35 for longevity. Even if our health system cost half as much, it would still be pathetic. I had walking pneumonia in 1981 but was too dumb to figger out what I had. Made an appointment with an allopath for day or two later. He sent me across the hall to his friend that had an X-Ray machine, went back, the original doctor read the X-Ray and called it pleurisy. I already knew what the antique word was. I think that I trashed the prescription or bought it but didn't take any. I believe that the total was less than U$D100 and didn't bother with insurance. Today, it would have cost a fortune and they would have prescribed an expensive placebo like tamiflu. I've only used health insurance once and quickly found that I didn't want the doctor to work for an insurance company, I wanted the doctor to work for me. It was only minor injuries of me falling down tall steps backwards with a refrigerator on top. My head used a concrete wall to break the fall but I don't understand how the force of impact did not break the wall. I'll wait for some more experienced help the next time I need to move a refrigerator. The cost that the insurance paid was trivial. A few stitches are not that expensive. I'll never use insurance again unless it is for something extremely expensive. You are 100% wrong. Capitalism is competition. Big Pharma, big medicine, big insurance, and others purchase laws to lock out everyone except them. Big food, agri, auto, and many others do the same. Big pharma then require the FDA to require the AMA to require the doctors to treat for as long as possible with expensive procedures and expensive drugs but avoid a cure. For thousands of years, medicine was simple. You went to a doctor, described the symptoms, received advice for herbs, diet, exercises, sunlight, or other cures. Many of their cures are now outlawed. Osteopathic medicine is about all that is left but even that is under heavy controls and its use is discouraged. You seem to be blaming the insurance companies for the hospital bills. If the hospital bills were reasonable, the insurance companies would only be needed for catastrophic illness. Get rid of about 99% or our laws and switch to a capitalistic system and prices would drop to a fraction of what they are now and health would improve like you remember from 60 years ago. Japan had a horrible infant mortality rate. Not near as bad as the U.S.A. but still horrible. They passed one law and infant mortality immediately became the lowest of any country on the planet. They had outlawed giving children below two years of age any vaccine. Just stopping DPT/SIDS had to have a huge impact. No more MMR so no more measles brain seizures until the children could tolerate it better. Politics and the international medical community made them ease up on the law and then repeal it so it didn't last too long. Charging $14,000 for minor treatment is what needs to be fixed. It is wrong to force 34 million people to purchase medical insurance whether they like allopathic medicine or not or have the money for the ridicules premiums or not or live near the Mexican border so can go across as needed or can fly to South Africa for needed procedures cheaper than paying for them in the U.S.A. Claiming that forcing the remaining claim of ten percent or other claimed percentage to purchase a product that they either don't want or cannot afford will not cut insurance premiums in half. Since most people without insurance avoid medical care, the extra people forced under the insurance racket will not reduce insurance premiums at all. The greater control of all peoples health costs can only increase medical costs. i.e. Removing any remaining choice is not the way to drive down prices. The problem is not a lack of laws controlling what ever U.S. subject does and says. The problem is the laws controlling what ever U.S. subject does and says. Good. Bankrupt or boycott government give-away programs. They are not good for the people that receive them and are not good for the economy and are not good for the taxpayers. Taxpayers should not be paying for big government to destroy peoples initiative. It ain't right. The government and government/business caused problems are clear. The question is how to fix: 1. Since government control does not work, add more controls to cause the problem to be worse. 2. Since government control does not work, get rid of government controls. i.e. If I want to open an "anti-doctor" shop next door, let me. I'll give medicine and treatments like doctors have done for thousands of years. I will ignore all government control of healthful cures. My aim would be to cure and avoid treatment with lifetime daily shots and pills for people. I would be locked up the first day. Even quicker than the people running the raw milk co-opt. </pre> somitcw 2012-05-09T03:57:54 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/628 <pre>And the bills you don't pay get rolled over into next years increased rate that cause even more people to file for bankruptcy. Until everyone gets insurance that pays most bills (single payer). Illinois has a Medicare program, but no dentist accepts their payments. Medicaid MDs are few and far between. Medicare (over 65) is not much more. Ever see Sicko? http://sickothemovie.com/ How about 'The Awful Truth' first episode segment http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0915881/ "Funeral at an HMO" about several people dying due to denied insurance approval. On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 2:36 PM, "Fish" (David B. Trout) &lt;fish-6N/dkqvhA+1g9hUCZPvPmw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org&gt; wrote: </pre> Mike Schwab 2012-05-08T20:09:59 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/627 <pre> [...] I never said that nor implied it. I was simply lamenting the total cost of a few visits to the hospital. My wife caught pneumonia on New Year's day a year ago. Called a taxi and told them to take us to the hospital. (We haven't owned a car in over 15 years and so rely on public transportation.) They took us to the "wrong" hospital. They took us to one we had never been to before, but a hospital is a hospital, right? She was in a room for a grand total of ABOUT 6 hours. In that 6 hours they gave her some IV solution. They gave her some inhalation therapy. They took an x-ray. They reviewed the x-ray, talked to her for 15 minutes, prescribed some medication and sent us home. Four days later she was still feeling badly, so we called our "normal" hospital (the one we usually go to). They said to bring her in immediately. We did so. THEY went through the exact same procedure: IV, inhalation therapy, x-ray, 15 minutes with the doctor, here's your prescription now get out of here. Time spent: about 6 hours again. My visits were for sciatica. They left me in a room for a hour or two, gave me some meds (opiates; I was in extreme pain), did a leg lift examination, prescribed different meds, sent me home. About three weeks later I went through the same procedure again (the meds only lasted less than a week and then the pain came back (heh! no pun intended) IN FORCE. Worse than before. That's why I went back.), but this time demanded an x-ray or MRI or whatever, to determine what the underlying CAUSE was so we could treat THAT instead of simply treating the fucking SYMPTOMS like they were. Had an MRI done under sedation (general anesthesia). Grand total so far (that we KNOW of; they keep sending bills from many different places. From different departments in the hospital, from different doctor groups, medical groups, etc. We got bills from over a dozen different places!) was almost $14,000. (The actual total is probably much more than that but that was the total at the time we filed for bankruptcy). $14,000+ for what? 6 hours in a room, twice. 2-3 hours in a room, twice, 2 x-rays. Some medication. A grand total of about 30 minutes attention from the nursing staff. A grand total of about 20-30 minutes talking to a doctor. Is that fair? In my opinion it is not. The only reason they're charging so much is they can get away with it. And my "they" I mean the entire medical industry. The drug manufacturers. The insurance companies. (You wouldn't believe what they charge a doctor for malpractice insurance these days!) The hospitals. The MRI machine and x-ray machine manufacturers. The manufacturers of plastic tubing and plastic hoses. The manufacturers of hospital beds. Oxygen supply companies. Food service. Etc, etc, etc... It's like the military that gets charged $600 for a toilet seat. It's nuts. It's pure capitalism at its worse. They know they've got us by the balls. When we're sick or in pain or our very life is threatened, they can charge whatever outrageous price they want because they know we'll pay it. We can't "shop around" when it's an emergency. For routine doctor visits, yeah, we can shop around. But most of them are working for the insurance industry. "Medical insurance" Think about what that means! Insurance is a business wherein you pay money without ever expecting to get it back. No one expects to have an accident or plans to have one or eventually WANTS to have one. The only thing they EXPECT is that, god forbid, if/when they DO happen to need medical attention, that it's paid for. That's why they're paying their premium! But insurance companies HATE paying claims, because paying claims is a "loss". They lose money when they pay claims, so they go to great lengths to purposely AVOID having to pay claims, so they can make the maximum profit possible. A profit at the "expense" of the very people they "claim" they are trying to help! It's nuts! Their incentive is to *deny* claims. Their incentive is to *deny* medical attention. Their incentive is BACKWARDS! Why? Because they're an INSURANCE business. Before medical practice got fucked things up with "managed health care" (i.e. the medical insurance scam), there were just doctors. People with medical skills that hung a shingle out and offered people their services for a reasonable fee. Many of them came to your house with their little black bag when you called them. When was the last time you saw that? In those days if you didn't like the SERVICE your doctor was giving you, you went to a different one. He lost business, the other one gained. The incentive was to provide the best service possible for the best price! If you didn't provide good service or if your prices were too high, you didn't make money (or as much) due to lack of customers. Thus the incentive BEFORE the insurance industry fucked things up, was to PROVIDE medical care, not to deny it like today! Today's bullshit system makes me sick to my stomach. Why can't people just do the right thing instead of whatever they can get away with to make a buck? Call me an idealist. I firmly believe that if one does the right the money will eventually come. But unfortunately the bad guys (i.e. capitalists with no morals) prefer to short-circuit the system and screw over anyone and everyone they can get away with in order to make some short term fast money, so they can skip town and repeat the whole thing all over again. It's sickening. Literally. </pre> "Fish" (David B. Trout 2012-05-08T19:36:39 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/626 <pre> On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 09:02:28AM -0800, Ray Mullins wrote: Jay Maynard &lt;jmaynard&lt; at &gt;...&gt; wrote: Indeed. If past experience is anything to go by, Hercules won't get much support from the wider open source community. Apart from the fact that very few people know or care much about the mainframe, it turns out that some of the most prominent Open Source organizations are funded by IBM and are consequently reluctant to bite the hand that feeds them. Roger Bowler </pre> Roger Bowler 2011-11-09T15:25:50 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/625 <pre> Been there, tried that, with limited success so far. </pre> Jay Maynard 2011-11-07T17:12:07 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/624 <pre>One thing that could be used against IBM: they have been a big, vocal, public proponent of open source. The most obvious example is the championing of Linux on the System z platform. If it became known that IBM was saying one thing, but then selectively crushing certain open source projects, then the negative publicity could become a monkey on Pok's back. 2011/11/7 ron.hilton &lt;ron.hilton-Wuw85uim5zDR7s880joybQ&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org&gt; </pre> Ray Mullins 2011-11-07T17:02:28 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/623 <pre>Jay, If Open Source Mainframes, Inc. (OSMI?) has enough funds to have an attorney draft a form license agreement along the lines I suggested (non-commercial rights to OSMI, commercially sublicensable to IBM), my offer stands to file a limited number of PPAs for the cost of filing on behalf of Hercules developers who execute that agreement with OSMI. As I suggested, it would probably be well to do an internal review by the Hercules development community first to decide which applications are most worth pursuing. Thanks, Ron Hilton _____ From: hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org [mailto:hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Jay Maynard Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 8:24 AM To: hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org Subject: Re: [hercules-advocacy] Re: Pushing back the barriers and beingdemolished by IBM On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 08:20:50AM -0700, ron.hilton wrote: against would seeking in Just a note: The "Hercules, Inc" you refer to actually exists. It's a nonprofit, soon-to-be-charity (of the 501(c)(3) variety) named Open Source Mainframes, Inc. It would have some funds, but not enough to wage a high-powered patent fight of the type required to have any sort of a chance at beating IBM. </pre> ron.hilton 2011-11-07T15:37:55 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/622 <pre> Just a note: The "Hercules, Inc" you refer to actually exists. It's a nonprofit, soon-to-be-charity (of the 501(c)(3) variety) named Open Source Mainframes, Inc. It would have some funds, but not enough to wage a high-powered patent fight of the type required to have any sort of a chance at beating IBM. </pre> Jay Maynard 2011-11-07T15:23:51 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/621 <pre>Roger, It is true that the investor's ability to recoup would be limited to commercial non-IBM use. They would not recoup anything from non-commercial Hercules or from IBM, and the investor would take that into account in valuing the investment. Your own venture TurboHercules is an example of where an investor might recoup. If you were successful in commercializing something that a Hercules developer invented and patented, even a modest royalty would likely provide a decent return on the low 5-figure investment to get the patent. It would not be up to the investor to mount an infringement lawsuit against IBM. That would be up to Hercules. Although Hercules essentially has no funds, if it had some truly valuable IP, there would likely be law firms willing to take the case on contingency. And IBM knows that, and thus would be motivated to settle, especially since Hercules would primarily be seeking non-monetary consideration (as long as lawyers don't need to get involved in a big way) such as immunity from IBM patents for non-commercial Hercules use, hobbyist software licensing, etc. Let me repeat that I am not a lawyer and am not offering legal advice. I'm just offering some limited pro-bono patent assistance. You need to get a lawyer to look into the whole idea if you think it might be worth pursuing. Thanks, Ron Hilton _____ From: hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org [mailto:hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Roger Bowler Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:16 AM To: hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org Subject: [hercules-advocacy] Re: Pushing back the barriers and being demolished by IBM --- In hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org &lt;mailto:hercules-advocacy%40yahoogroups.com&gt; , Ron Hilton wrote: ... ... Ron, this all sounds ok except for two things: Firstly, what incentive would any investor have to pay for the patent to be filed? As we have seen from recent cases, IBM have various means at their disposal to enforce their monopoly in the mainframe space, making commercial use of the patent by anyone other than IBM almost impossible in practical terms. So it's difficult to see how such a patent would be of any value to an investor, especially if a hypothetical "Hercules Inc" has already granted IBM a license to use it. Secondly, there's not just the cost of filing the patent, but the cost of defending it too. IBM could simply choose to ignore the patent because they know full well that the cost of taking patent action against them would ruin anyone except a mega-corporation. Even if the patent holder is right in law, IBM have the resources to string out the action until the patent holder goes bankrupt or is forced to capitulate on IBM's terms. The value of the patent to our hypothetical investor would have to be enormous to justify the expense of mounting an action against IBM for infringement. I cannot see anyone on the horizon who is going to take on that sort of liability. Regards, Roger Bowler Hercules "the people's mainframe" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] </pre> ron.hilton 2011-11-07T15:20:50 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/620 <pre>I don't think IP is taxable unless is it being commercialized. But once again, I am not a lawyer nor a tax expert. Hercules would need to get professional advice on these matters. _____ From: hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org [mailto:hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Charles Durrett Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 7:54 AM To: hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org Subject: [hercules-advocacy] Re: Pushing back the barriers and being demolished by IBM A reply out of 'left field: More appropriate to the whole 'intellectual property' thing than patents specifically, but if there is such a thing as 'intellectual property' shouldn't there be property taxes paid on it? Seems like it would be a counter-balance to the hoarders of same which value IP so highly in their court filings. The higher they self-appraise the property the more taxes they would be expected to pay. Just wondering... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] </pre> ron.hilton 2011-11-07T15:18:55 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/619 <pre>A reply out of 'left field: More appropriate to the whole 'intellectual property' thing than patents specifically, but if there is such a thing as 'intellectual property' shouldn't there be property taxes paid on it? Seems like it would be a counter-balance to the hoarders of same which value IP so highly in their court filings. The higher they self-appraise the property the more taxes they would be expected to pay. Just wondering... </pre> Charles Durrett 2011-11-07T14:53:43 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/618 <pre> --- In hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org, Ron Hilton wrote: ... ... Ron, this all sounds ok except for two things: Firstly, what incentive would any investor have to pay for the patent to be filed? As we have seen from recent cases, IBM have various means at their disposal to enforce their monopoly in the mainframe space, making commercial use of the patent by anyone other than IBM almost impossible in practical terms. So it's difficult to see how such a patent would be of any value to an investor, especially if a hypothetical "Hercules Inc" has already granted IBM a license to use it. Secondly, there's not just the cost of filing the patent, but the cost of defending it too. IBM could simply choose to ignore the patent because they know full well that the cost of taking patent action against them would ruin anyone except a mega-corporation. Even if the patent holder is right in law, IBM have the resources to string out the action until the patent holder goes bankrupt or is forced to capitulate on IBM's terms. The value of the patent to our hypothetical investor would have to be enormous to justify the expense of mounting an action against IBM for infringement. I cannot see anyone on the horizon who is going to take on that sort of liability. Regards, Roger Bowler Hercules "the people's mainframe" </pre> Roger Bowler 2011-11-07T14:16:12 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/617 <pre>Ron, This is a terribly complex subject but you are beginning to convince me. Regards, Roger Bowler Hercules "the people's mainframe" </pre> Roger Bowler 2011-11-05T22:11:45 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/616 <pre>Roger, As a registered independent US patent agent, I would be willing to provide some limited pro bono assistance to Hercules. My small, part-time solo practice is devoted exclusively to provisional patent applications (PPAs) which as you may know are only valid for one year, and must be followed up by a regular, non-provisional utility application (NPA). With a client who is willing to roll up their sleeves and do some of the work, I can typically keep the cost of a PPA under $1K. Of that, I would be willing to waive all but filing fee (about $100) for a limited number of Hercules PPAs. When it comes time to file the NPA, that's where it starts to get more expensive, but you have a year to try to raise the funds. Here's a possible sequence for how it could work: 1.Hercules developer agrees to license any patents which may be applicable to IBM mainframe technology to Hercules for non-commercial use, with a provision permitting Hercules to sublicense them to IBM for commercial use. You would need to get the services of an attorney to draft this agreement and create the legal entity that would hold the licensed patent rights for Hercules (the "patents common"). I am not a lawyer so I can't help you there. Someone would have to come up with the money for that. 2.Hercules developer invents a patentable idea, and writes up a thorough description of it including block diagrams and flow charts. 3.Hercules developer runs the idea by other developers, privately under NDA (you might want the attorney to help in drafting the NDA as well). This internal review should be done privately, not on a forum like this. Although there is a one year grace period if the invention is disclosed publicly, you don't want to go there. That's a fall-back for inventors who didn't know better to keep things confidential before filing, and is risky. 4.After the internal Hercules review, the invention would be submitted to me to do a cursory prior art search, edit the description as necessary, develop an initial set of claims, and file a PPA (developer pays the filing fee only). 5.Now the invention can be discussed in public, if necessary. 6.The developer/inventor has a year to decide whether to take the next step of filing an NPA, and raise money if necessary. If the developer is not rich and altruistic enough to personally pay for the NPA, they would need to find an investor during that one-year period of PPA pendency. Investors need to see a return on their investment. Although the developer has agreed to license the invention for non-commercial Hercules use and commercial IBM use, they would still retain the rights for commercial non-IBM use. For example, if someone wanted to commercialize Hercules (e.g. TurboHercules), they would have to obtain a separate license from the developer/inventor. The royalties from that license could then be used to provide a return to the investor(s). Regarding the fact that IBM has a huge and growing patent portfolio, that benefits them in the sense that it becomes overwhelming for Hercules to prove non-infringement. But it would only take one really good Hercules patent, that IBM needs in order to move forward with their product plans, to bring them to the bargaining table. The discussion at that point has moved beyond the question of infringement, which is tacitly acknowledged by the fact that a license is being negotiated. Depending on the strength and number of Hercules patents, and how badly IBM needs them, it might even be possible to negotiate a free or nominal hobbyist license for IBM software products on Hercules for non-commercial use. One other point that bears repeating is that the Hercules license (in 1. above) should cover patents which are applicable to IBM mainframe technology in general, not just applicable to Hercules. Otherwise it only provides leverage with respect to IBM's emulation efforts, which are very limited (e.g. z/PDT). Hercules needs to develop more general mainframe-related intellectual property (IP) to really get IBM's attention. The Hercules developers are a savvy bunch of mainframe experts. If they put their thinking caps on, and look ahead to where IBM is likely to go with their future mainframe plans, they may be able to come up with some really good IP that IBM would want to have. Basically, they need to think like a troll, but with a white hat for the good of Hercules, not a black hat for their own benefit. In this regard, I have already pointed out one potentially fruitful area for Hercules IP, which is interoperability with non-mainframe hardware and software (as you may recall, I brought this up in connection with the "proxy coupling" technology that I am currently developing). IBM's latest mainframe product, with its "hybrid" capability, would seem to be signaling a move in that direction. BTW, I believe that some of the IP we developed at PSI has been incorporated by IBM into their hybrid technology. A small group of developers can really make an impact if they set their minds to it. Thanks, Ron Hilton _____ From: hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org [mailto:hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Roger Bowler Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 7:55 AM To: hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org Subject: [hercules-advocacy] Re: Pushing back the barriers and being demolished by IBM --- In hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org &lt;mailto:hercules-advocacy%40yahoogroups.com&gt; , Ron Hilton wrote: Ron, While I can see the logic in what you propose, I think you might be overestimating the wealth of the average Herculean. A previous note in this forum estimated the cost of filing a patent to be $10,000 minimum and probably a lot more. Just one patent is WAY out of the league of anything Herculeans could afford. And I don't see anyone else stepping up to pay for it. When you consider that IBM claims to have 40,000 patents already and is increasing that number by over 3000 per year (see http://www.ibm.com/ibm/licensing/patents/ ) it means that EVERY WORKING DAY they gain more than 10 new ways to stifle competitive invention. At that rate, even if we could afford the cost (and the peg to place on our nose while we file the patent application), filing for one or two patents as a strategy for combatting IBM's stranglehold on the mainframe marketplace seems to me like whistling in the wind. Kind regards, Roger Bowler Hercules "the people's mainframe" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] </pre> ron.hilton 2011-11-04T17:18:08 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/615 <pre> --- In hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org, Ron Hilton wrote: Ron, While I can see the logic in what you propose, I think you might be overestimating the wealth of the average Herculean. A previous note in this forum estimated the cost of filing a patent to be $10,000 minimum and probably a lot more. Just one patent is WAY out of the league of anything Herculeans could afford. And I don't see anyone else stepping up to pay for it. When you consider that IBM claims to have 40,000 patents already and is increasing that number by over 3000 per year (see http://www.ibm.com/ibm/licensing/patents/ ) it means that EVERY WORKING DAY they gain more than 10 new ways to stifle competitive invention. At that rate, even if we could afford the cost (and the peg to place on our nose while we file the patent application), filing for one or two patents as a strategy for combatting IBM's stranglehold on the mainframe marketplace seems to me like whistling in the wind. Kind regards, Roger Bowler Hercules "the people's mainframe" </pre> Roger Bowler 2011-11-04T13:55:03 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/614 <pre>Herculeans, I think the EU and the US DOJ are both still investigating IBM on this matter, irrespective of the withdrawal of complaints or lawsuits by private parties. Antitrust enforcement is really the only legal remedy for a situation like this, where a market incumbent asserts their intellectual property (IP) to block competitive enhancements to their technology from ever reaching the market. Having said that, the legal remedy should be the last resort. The best remedy is a commercial one, which is to develop one's own IP portfolio. As I have stated before on this forum, the best defense is a good offense when it comes to IP. Has Hercules yet considered creating or joining a software patent commons? The key would be to develop at least one high-value patent that IBM needs or wants for their proprietary mainframe product plans. Then Hercules would then have some leverage to induce IBM to put their mainframe IP into the software commons for non-commercial use, in exchange for allowing them commercial use of the Hercules IP. Ron Hilton _____ From: hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org [mailto:hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of kerravon86 Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 4:20 AM To: hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org Subject: [hercules-advocacy] Re: Pushing back the barriers and being demolished by IBM --- In hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org &lt;mailto:hercules-advocacy%40yahoogroups.com&gt; , "Roger Bowler" &lt;rogerbowler&lt; at &gt;...&gt; wrote: &lt;mailto:hercules-advocacy%40yahoogroups.com&gt; , Harold Grovesteen A pity we still don't know why a complaint would be voluntarily withdrawn. I would had hoped to see the outcome of that ruling and wished that the EU would tell IBM that they can't claim the mainframe to be "just another server" which only a complete dope would fall for. BFN. Paul. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] </pre> ron.hilton 2011-11-03T14:40:42 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/613 <pre> A pity we still don't know why a complaint would be voluntarily withdrawn. I would had hoped to see the outcome of that ruling and wished that the EU would tell IBM that they can't claim the mainframe to be "just another server" which only a complete dope would fall for. BFN. Paul. </pre> kerravon86 2011-08-17T10:20:24 http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy/612 <pre> --- In hercules-advocacy-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw&lt; at &gt;public.gmane.org, Harold Grovesteen On a more serious note, no that was never the intention. </pre> Roger Bowler 2011-08-10T14:03:06 Search the mailing list at Gmane query http://search.gmane.org/?group=$group=gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.advocacy